# File under Apologetics.  KABOOM!!!



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 30, 2014)

If you have not seen the movie God's Not Dead, go see it.  It provides a powerful argument for the existence of God, so powerful in fact it should probably come with an A/A warning.


----------



## ted_BSR (Mar 30, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> If you have not seen the movie God's Not Dead, go see it.  It provides a powerful argument for the existence of God, so powerful in fact it should probably come with an A/A warning.



Haven't seen it, but is sounds like it should be rated NC-A/A.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 30, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> Haven't seen it, but is sounds like it should be rated NC-A/A.



Good one


----------



## 660griz (Mar 31, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> If you have not seen the movie God's Not Dead, go see it.  It provides a powerful argument for the existence of God, so powerful in fact it should probably come with an A/A warning.



I saw it. Still don't believe. Must not be very powerful argument...unless you just need validation. 

Of course, Mr. Professor, 'hates' God and is angry. He just needed a good story to get back in the flock. 

I don't hate God...or unicorns.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 31, 2014)

So it wasn't a powerful argument because YOU don't believe it?
Ohhhh I seeee.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Mar 31, 2014)

So it was a powerful argument because YOU believe it? 
Ohhhh I seeee.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 31, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> So it was a powerful argument because YOU believe it?
> Ohhhh I seeee.



Noooooo.  Not at all.  It was a powerful argument, because it was a good example of providing a comprehensive answer that corresponds to what we actually know is true based on both science and logical reasoning.  That is why it was a powerful argument.  I think an impartial person of which neither I nor Griz are, would agree.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 31, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Noooooo.  Not at all.  It was a powerful argument, because it was a good example of providing a comprehensive answer that corresponds to what we actually know is true based on both science and logical reasoning.  That is why it was a powerful argument.  I think an impartial person of which neither I nor Griz are, would agree.



Science and logical reasoning are worthy of your consideration in this case yet are scoffed at by you when both are used to disagree with you.
Neat.


----------



## 660griz (Mar 31, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> So it wasn't a powerful argument because YOU don't believe it?
> Ohhhh I seeee.



Perhaps. There were some good points. However, these were far overshadowed by the cliche characters where all are evil against the poor lone christian. Atheist is only atheist because of a tragedy. He hates God. How can you be an atheist and hate something you don't believe? Not a very realistic way most atheist come to be.

Every non-christian character was portrayed as the bad guy. Muslims were women beaters and had to be converted. 

Any actual atheist professor of philosophy could have probably gone toe to toe with young bible thumper but, luckily for him, he gets the angry one. 

Even for Christians, this film should be an embarrassment. The level of propaganda was at a new high. 

I was even embarrassed for Christians watching this. It should be insulting to everyone.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Mar 31, 2014)

Someone who hates god, is not an atheist....


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 31, 2014)

660griz said:


> Perhaps. There were some good points. However, these were far overshadowed by the cliche characters where all are evil against the poor lone christian. Atheist is only atheist because of a tragedy. He hates God. How can you be an atheist and hate something you don't believe? Not a very realistic way most atheist come to be.
> 
> Every non-christian character was portrayed as the bad guy. Muslims were women beaters and had to be converted.
> 
> ...



Not sure we are discussing the same movie.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 31, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Someone who hates god, is not an atheist....



Really?  Well show me another group that spends so much of their time railing against him.  Show me another group that rails against Santa, the Easter Bunny or unicorns with such open contempt.   Show me another group whose very existence depends on the concept of a non entity not existing.  It's absurd to make such a statement in the first place.  The very fact you used the word God to deny him , acknowledges him .


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 31, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Really?  Well show me another group that spends so much of their time railing against him.  Show me another group that rails against Santa, the Easter Bunny or unicorns with such open contempt.   Show me another group whose very existence depends on the concept of a non entity not existing.  It's absurd to make such a statement in the first place.  The very fact you used the word God to deny him , acknowledges him .



If people that believed in Santa Clause tried to enact laws based on what Santa thinks there would be conflict.  Luckily the Santa believers keep it to themselves like you should.


----------



## drippin' rock (Mar 31, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Really?  Well show me another group that spends so much of their time railing against him.  Show me another group that rails against Santa, the Easter Bunny or unicorns with such open contempt.   Show me another group whose very existence depends on the concept of a non entity not existing.  It's absurd to make such a statement in the first place.  The very fact you used the word God to deny him , acknowledges him .



I think most here just rail against you.


----------



## ted_BSR (Mar 31, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> If people that believed in Santa Clause tried to enact laws based on what Santa thinks there would be conflict.  Luckily the Santa believers keep it to themselves like you should.



So, because he believes in God he should keep his mouth shut?

That is a hateful and close minded perspective. I wouldn't have expected that from you.


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 31, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> If people that believed in Santa Clause tried to enact laws based on what Santa thinks there would be conflict.  Luckily the Santa believers keep it to themselves like you should.






ted_BSR said:


> So, because he believes in God he should keep his mouth shut?
> 
> That is a hateful and close minded perspective. I wouldn't have expected that from you.



From your perspective, witnessing is somehow loving.  From my perspective I feel it embarrasses the whole human race.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> If people that believed in Santa Clause tried to enact laws based on what Santa thinks there would be conflict.  Luckily the Santa believers keep it to themselves like you should.



It's inevitable.  Atheist do the same exact thing.  They are two opposing world views.  People from each view try to sway the system as they should in Republic.  It's our right, mine as well as yours.   To state that only Christians do it is patently false.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

drippin' rock said:


> I think most here just rail against you.



Yep.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> So, because he believes in God he should keep his mouth shut?
> 
> That is a hateful and close minded perspective. I wouldn't have expected that from you.



Why?  Tolerance and inclusiveness don't mean what most think they mean.  They are only monikers for silencing dissent and replacing one ideology with another.  

As an example take the homosexual issue.  Those two terms have been used very effectively to silence any dissent and force "acceptance"  not "tolerance" which are not the same.  See the recent law SB 1062 and what has happened with it.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> From your perspective, witnessing is somehow loving.  From my perspective I feel it embarrasses the whole human race.



Good example.  So because you feel that way, you or if not you, others with the same view as you will take to the courts or Congress to silence us.  Like I said, it's not tolerance, it's silencing dissent and it's very dangerous to a Republic or any free society because whenever it happens freedom is being lost by everyone.  Even the ones who win the battle lose ground to the government.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 1, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Really?  Well show me another group that spends so much of their time railing against him.  Show me another group that rails against Santa, the Easter Bunny or unicorns with such open contempt.   Show me another group whose very existence depends on the concept of a non entity not existing.  It's absurd to make such a statement in the first place.  The very fact you used the word God to deny him , acknowledges him .



I acknowledge the idea that you and people like you believe he's something real. If I didn't do that I would be completely ignorant. We've said it a thousand times. The first two As MUST play in your fantasy land in order to have conversations here... but it is not a fantasy, nor is it an admission that there is some being there, for me to use the word god. I know exactly what I'm referring to. You, obviously, do not.

Someone who hates god is completely NOT atheist. Yes, there are people who say that they are atheist because they are mad at god. Just like people like you say they are good loving christians yet hate on atheist all day long. The "railing" against christians that I see as useful is just that, railing against PEOPLE and what they want to do in the name of their god.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> From your perspective, witnessing is somehow loving.  From my perspective I feel it embarrasses the whole human race.



Good example.  So because you feel that way, you or if not you, others with the same view as you will take to the courts or Congress to silence us.  Like I said, it's not tolerance, it's silencing dissent and it's very dangerous to a Republic or any free society because whenever it happens freedom is being lost by everyone.  Even the ones who win the battle lose ground to the government.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> I acknowledge the idea that you and people like you believe he's something real. If I didn't do that I would be completely ignorant. We've said it a thousand times. The first two As MUST play in your fantasy land in order to have conversations here... but it is not a fantasy, nor is it an admission that there is some being there, for me to use the word god. I know exactly what I'm referring to. You, obviously, do not.
> 
> Someone who hates god is completely NOT atheist. Yes, there are people who say that they are atheist because they are mad at god. Just like people like you say they are good loving christians yet hate on atheist all day long. The "railing" against christians that I see as useful is just that, railing against PEOPLE and what they want to do in the name of their god.



Do you spend the same amount of energy debating with children who believe in Santa or adults who worship crystals?  If not why?


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 1, 2014)

Because those things don't impact me at all. I actually told my daughter about Santa and those fake people when she was 6. I didn't like it. If there was a Santa following, people who based their entire existence on him and then tried to tell me I was wrong because I put that away as a child, then yes, I would spend some amount of energy trying to convince them that they were stupid and childish.  The majority of the world thinks that adults who worship crystals are stupid and childish... and I've never had any one tell me I needed to worship crystals. If I heard it all over the place, I would try to convince them that they were stupid and childish too.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

For the record I don't "hate on" any atheist.  I oppose their belief on all fronts, and almost their entire agenda,  but I don't hate the people that buy into it.  I honestly feel sorry for them.   I believe they have bought into a lie that is destructive, and even though they may lead a good moral life(in many cases better than the one I lead), in the end they will spend eternity in He11.  I don't wish that on anyone, but that's what I fully believe.  That's why I keep coming back here, so you(not specifically you) can keep on with the sarcasm, and insults and denigration, but if something I say can keep one person from having to spend eternity in He11, then it's worth it.

Addendum:  "stupid and childish".  Well maybe it does include you, but that's ok too.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 1, 2014)

Would you think that someone is stupid and childish for worshiping a crystal?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Would you think that someone is stupid and childish for worshiping a crystal?



No.  Only misguided.  Even crystal Worshipers feel the need to worship something?  The appetite is there.  It's only being fed something of no value, but no, not stupid nor childish.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 1, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Good example.  So because you feel that way, you or if not you, others with the same view as you will take to the courts or Congress to silence us.  Like I said, it's not tolerance, it's silencing dissent and it's very dangerous to a Republic or any free society because whenever it happens freedom is being lost by everyone.  Even the ones who win the battle lose ground to the government.



Laws should be based on reason, never, ever on superstition.  You can even vote if you hear voices in your head....to a point.

_GEORGIA
A person adjudicated mentally
incompetent cannot register, remain
registered, or vote unless the disability
has been removed. G
A
. art. 2, § 1, ¶
III(b); G
A
. C
ODE
A
NN
. § 21-2-216(b).
A person must be adjudicated mentally
incompetent before the right to vote is
removed. 1995 Op. Attâ€™y Gen. No. 95-
27.
The appointment of a guardian
is not a determination regarding
the right of the ward to vote.
G
A
.
C
ODE
A
NN
. § 29-4-20(b)
Patients may vote if
otherwise eligible under state
law. Facility administrators
shall permit and reasonably
assist patients with
registration, voting
prerequisites, and absentee
ballots. G
A
. C
ODE
A
NN
. §
37-3-144.
Clients may vote if otherwise
eligible. Facility
administrators shall permit
and reasonably assist
patients with registration,
voting prerequisites, and
absentee ballots. G
A
. C
ODE
A
NN
. § 37-4-104._


----------



## drippin' rock (Apr 1, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> For the record I don't "hate on" any atheist.  I oppose their belief on all fronts, and almost their entire agenda,  but I don't hate the people that buy into it.  I honestly feel sorry for them.   I believe they have bought into a lie that is destructive, and even though they may lead a good moral life(in many cases better than the one I lead), in the end they will spend eternity in He11.  I don't wish that on anyone, but that's what I fully believe.  That's why I keep coming back here, so you(not specifically you) can keep on with the sarcasm, and insults and denigration, but if something I say can keep one person from having to spend eternity in He11, then it's worth it.
> 
> Addendum:  "stupid and childish".  Well maybe it does include you, but that's ok too.



Crystal rubbers and santy claus lovers aren't telling me I am going to burn because I don't believe like them.  

I really get the feeling you should spend more time on self-reflection than spending time on here hoping to catch that one errant soul. Your brand of zeal is not contagious.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 1, 2014)

drippin' rock said:


> Crystal rubbers and santy claus lovers aren't telling me I am going to burn because I don't believe like them.
> 
> I really get the feeling you should spend more time on self-reflection than spending time on here hoping to catch that one errant soul. Your brand of zeal is not contagious.



At least he's not casting the FIRST stone....


----------



## bullethead (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> If people that believed in Santa Clause tried to enact laws based on what Santa thinks there would be conflict.  Luckily the Santa believers keep it to themselves like you should.



Spot On


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 1, 2014)

drippin' rock said:


> Crystal rubbers and santy claus lovers aren't telling me I am going to burn because I don't believe like them.
> 
> I really get the feeling you should spend more time on self-reflection than spending time on here hoping to catch that one errant soul. Your brand of zeal is not contagious.



I don't mind if Santa Clause worshipers think that I'm gonna burn. It's that they use their self absorbed piety to make them feel as though they don't have to subject their beliefs to reason.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

drippin' rock said:


> Crystal rubbers and santy claus lovers aren't telling me I am going to burn because I don't believe like them.



Is that why you don't like Christians?



drippin' rock said:


> I really get the feeling you should spend more time on self-reflection than spending time on here hoping to catch that one errant soul. Your brand of zeal is not contagious.



Appreciate the concern, but it's my decision to make.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 1, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> it's my decision to make.



Is that right


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> I don't mind if Santa Clause worshipers think that I'm gonna burn. It's that they use their self absorbed piety to make them feel as though they don't have to subject their beliefs to reason.



I find it comical that Atheist somehow think only they have cornered the market on reason when that couldn't be further from the truth.  I guess it's just another "evidence" of their supposedly intellectual superiority.  

Let me ask you?  " Which is worse, pride from "self absorbed piety" or pride from self ascribed intellect?  You be the judge?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Is that right



Yes


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 1, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I find it comical that Atheist somehow think only they have cornered the market on reason when that couldn't be further from the truth.  I guess it's just another "evidence" of their supposedly intellectual superiority.
> 
> Let me ask you?  " Which is worse, pride from "self absorbed piety" or pride from self ascribed intellect?  You be the judge?



Give me the "evidence" of a talking burning bush.  This is apologetics.  Make a case using physical, RATIONAL descriptions of how that might work.  To claim that such a thing can happen is an unreasonable contention.  Furthermore, to believe in such a thing happening is a reflection of some deficiency in intellect, most likely self imposed.  You make yourself silly by believing in the Ark and such.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 1, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Let me ask you?  " Which is worse, pride from "self absorbed piety" or pride from self ascribed intellect?  You be the judge?



Self absorbed piety of course. 
Pride in something that could be worked for, such as intellect, is good.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> Give me the "evidence" of a talking burning bush.  This is apologetics.  Make a case using physical, RATIONAL descriptions of how that might work.  To claim that such a thing can happen is an unreasonable contention.  Furthermore, to believe in such a thing happening is a reflection of some deficiency in intellect, most likely self imposed.  You make yourself silly by believing in the Ark and such.



It's time I'm not gonna waste.  Google William Lane Craig and study his Exposition on the Kaalam Cosmoligical Arguement if you are truly interested.  I'm betting agin it though. For whatever reason you won't allow for the idea of a supernatural being despite the fact that there is nothing illogical about that concept.  

Btw nice dodge on the question I asked.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 1, 2014)

660griz said:


> Self absorbed piety of course.
> Pride in something that could be worked for, such as intellect, is good.



Really.   That's telling but not surprising, especially in light of your previous statements.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> From your perspective, witnessing is somehow loving.  From my perspective I feel it embarrasses the whole human race.



It is very presumptuous and irrational for you to tell me what my own perspective is.

I want to make sure I understood your perspective, as you stated it. You believe that people that believe in a god are stupid and should keep their mouths shut, lest they embarrass the entire human race. Is that correct?

Are you listening to yourself? You sound like a very very dangerous person.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 1, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> Give me the "evidence" of a talking burning bush.  This is apologetics.  Make a case using physical, RATIONAL descriptions of how that might work.  To claim that such a thing can happen is an unreasonable contention.  Furthermore, to believe in such a thing happening is a reflection of some deficiency in intellect, most likely self imposed.  You make yourself silly by believing in the Ark and such.



The evidence is in scripture, which we all know you do not believe to be true. So there is your evidence, do with it what you will.

As for the explanation of the burning bush, I contend that God took the form of a bush, which caused it to burn, and He spoke through the form of the bush to His intended recipient. This is supernatural, but not unreasonable given my belief in the Bible (and the supernatural), and is therefore a rational idea (as the definition of rational depends on the definition of reasonable).

You make yourself seem silly by thinking that you have it all figured out Ambush. I don't have it all figured out, but I have a reasonable set of beliefs that our founded in rational thought, that I admit takes faith to sustain.

You're just right because YOU said so.


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 1, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> The evidence is in scripture, which we all know you do not believe to be true. So there is your evidence, do with it what you will.
> 
> As for the explanation of the burning bush, I contend that God took the form of a bush, which caused it to burn, and He spoke through the form of the bush to His intended recipient. This is supernatural, but not unreasonable given my belief in the Bible (and the supernatural), and is therefore a rational idea (as the definition of rational depends on the definition of reasonable).
> 
> ...



Very, very good post Ted.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 2, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> For whatever reason you won't allow for the idea of a supernatural being despite the fact that there is nothing illogical about that concept.
> 
> Btw nice dodge on the question I asked.



Apologetics doesn't allow you to say it's supernatural so don't worry about it... no??


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 2, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Apologetics doesn't allow you to say it's supernatural so don't worry about it... no??



Scratching my head on that one.  Might be easier for someone to explain why the supernatural is an illogical and unreasonable concept.  That's really what's at the heart of the matter if it's truly an intellectually exercise and not just your fancy.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 2, 2014)

You're saying that the burning, speaking bush is supernatural. That the flood is just supernatural, so don't worry about it, I don't have to explain anything about how it's logical or makes sense... But don't you need a reasonable argument to consider it apologetics? I don't think "it's supernatural" applies.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 2, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> I don't have to explain anything about how it's logical or makes sense...



Well actually you do if you want to be taken seriously, otherwise I guess you are correct.



TripleXBullies said:


> But don't you need a reasonable argument to consider it apologetics? I don't think "it's supernatural" applies.



Again I have referred you to WLC's cosmological argument .  I'm sorry but your simple "I don't think" carries no weight in and of itself.   If you want to review his argument and then discuss it I would be happy to do so, but just as has it has pointed out to you by others here recently, it takes more than just your fancy to make what you think have any validity.   

I'm sort of taken aback that as many times as atheist spout this, it doesn't seem to occur to them that it applies to their beliefs also.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 2, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well actually you do if you want to be taken seriously, otherwise I guess you are correct.



Agreed... and that's your stance on the bush...


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 2, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well actually you do if you want to be taken seriously, otherwise I guess you are correct.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You aren't understanding me.. I'm telling you that your "it's supernatural" explanation, is not an apologetic explanation.  I'm not telling you I don't fancy it. I'm telling you it's not apologetic. It's supernatural, so don't worry about me providing any reasoning behind it.... THAT DOESN'T WORK... 

Your response, actually, strengthens what I'm saying because you are trying to say that my fancy doesn't matter... When you're misunderstanding what I'm saying and then you're saying EXACTLY what I'm saying...


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 2, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> You aren't understanding me.. I'm telling you that your "it's supernatural" explanation, is not an apologetic explanation.  I'm not telling you I don't fancy it. I'm telling you it's not apologetic. It's supernatural, so don't worry about me providing any reasoning behind it.... THAT DOESN'T WORK...
> 
> Your response, actually, strengthens what I'm saying because you are trying to say that my fancy doesn't matter... When you're misunderstanding what I'm saying and then you're saying EXACTLY what I'm saying...




TXB where do you get these ideas?

Apologetic
noun
1.
a reasoned argument or writing in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine.

On what grounds does something being supernatural exclude it as a justification or an explanation?


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 2, 2014)

You're saying that, "it's supernatural" is a reasoned argument or justification?

When you can classify EVERYTHING in the bible under that exact same argument, it's just not enough.....


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 2, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> You're saying that, "it's supernatural" is a reasoned argument or justification?.



I'm saying that the concept of a supernatural, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and eternal being as a cause of this universe and everything in it is NOT an illogical position.   



TripleXBullies said:


> When you can classify EVERYTHING in the bible under that exact same argument, it's just not enough.....



Again, based on "what" other than you "say so."


----------



## bullethead (Apr 2, 2014)

con·cept
noun \Ëˆkän-ËŒsept\

: an idea of what something is or how it works

1
:  something conceived in the mind :  thought, notion
2
:  an abstract or generic idea generalized from particular instances


----------



## bullethead (Apr 2, 2014)

One of the basic laws of logic is that a thing can not be what it is not.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 2, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I'm saying that the concept of a supernatural, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and eternal being as a cause of this universe and everything in it is NOT an illogical position.



But The Flying Spaghetti Monster is?  How about Vishnu?  Is he illogical?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 2, 2014)

Logic dictates that a God would be perfect. The Bible is chock full of God being disappointed in his own work. It is illogical to think such a God is perfect.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 2, 2014)

ambush80 said:


> But The Flying Spaghetti Monster is?  How about Vishnu?  Is he illogical?


There is no getting around that if the case is made that the Christian God is logical that same logic applies to any and all deities man has ever worshipped.
If one is logical they all are.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 2, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> There is no getting around that if the case is made that the Christian God is logical that same logic applies to any and all deities man has ever worshipped.
> If one is logical they all are.



Not quiet.  Not ALL deities.  Some deities man has worshiped existed only within the universe, but you are correct to say that about all deities which existed outside and prior to the universe.  I could not say that Vishnu as the creator is an illogical proposition as he is also held to be eternal.  He as well as my God are equally logical, but that does nothing to make either illogical nor is it conceding that Vishnu is the one true God.  Other questions would be posed and answers obtained to determine that.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 3, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> There is no getting around that if the case is made that the Christian God is logical that same logic applies to any and all deities man has ever worshipped.
> If one is logical they all are.



The Christian God is quite illogical. We have all sinned and the fruits of that is eternal separation from God.
God loves us, illogically, and through the sacrifice of Jesus, and Jesus' resurrection, God provides us grace, and the opportunity to spend eternity in His presence, even though we don't deserve it. It is quite illogical.

Logic is a construct of man. A language by which we describe things.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 3, 2014)

bullethead said:


> Logic dictates that a God would be perfect. The Bible is chock full of God being disappointed in his own work. It is illogical to think such a God is perfect.



Logic doesn't dictate doodly squat.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 3, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> The Christian God is quite illogical. We have all sinned and the fruits of that is eternal separation from God.
> God loves us, illogically, and through the sacrifice of Jesus, and Jesus' resurrection, God provides us grace, and the opportunity to spend eternity in His presence, even though we don't deserve it. It is quite illogical.
> 
> Logic is a construct of man. A language by which we describe things.


I was referring to the actual existence of God or gods being logical not the actions attributed to them.


> Logic is a construct of man


Yes


> A language by which we describe things


Don't think the word "describe" is accurate.
Logic is a mode of reasoning. It has rules. It is void of emotion.
For example you can describe what you think the baby giraffe will look like when you mate your two German Shepherds. But its not logical that you think that will happen. You might have faith its true but that doesn't make it logical.


> God loves us, illogically, and through the sacrifice of Jesus, and Jesus' resurrection, God provides us grace, and the opportunity to spend eternity in His presence, even though we don't deserve it. It is quite illogical.


Only because of your emotions, that you have been indoctrinated that you are so much lower than God (filthy rags, pieces of poop have been used in here), do you think its illogical.
He loves you.
sacrificed Jesus
Jesus's resurrection
provides grace
opportunity to spend eternity with him
Logic dictates God believes you deserve it or you wouldn't have that list.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 3, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> Logic doesn't dictate doodly squat.


For some, I couldn't agree more.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 3, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> The Christian God is quite illogical. We have all sinned and the fruits of that is eternal separation from God.
> God loves us, illogically, and through the sacrifice of Jesus, and Jesus' resurrection, God provides us grace, and the opportunity to spend eternity in His presence, even though we don't deserve it. It is quite illogical.
> 
> Logic is a construct of man. A language by which we describe things.



Great, so apologetics, pleas step down.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I'm saying that the concept of a supernatural, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and eternal being as a cause of this universe and everything in it is NOT an illogical position.



Let's say that it makes perfect sense. Now, what logic would have that same being demand worship and money from one of the species it created, or they are to be tortured for eternity? It knows how to save everyone but, chooses not to. Just believe...and worship...and give money.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 3, 2014)

660griz said:


> Let's say that it makes perfect sense. Now, what logic would have that same being demand worship and money from one of the species it created, or they are to be tortured for eternity? It knows how to save everyone but, chooses not to. Just believe...and worship...and give money.



And this is a perfect example of where the wheels always seem to fall off discussions with most atheist.  Confronted with the choice of have an intellectually honest discussion and following it no matter where it may lead, many upon seeing where honesty and truth lead choose rather to engage in or introduce deception.

To answer your question, no it's not logical.  Do you even know why?  Because your caricature of God is a lie.  It's sad really.  You present an lie, portend it represents the truth of what others believe and then mock it.  

Do you in all,honesty not see that you are making a fool of yourself and losing all credibility by doing so.  Is it too much on your ego to say "There is a logical argument for God."  so much so that you must engage in dishonesty to the point of sacrificing your integrity for the sake of your pride?

Don't bother responding.  You've no credibility with me.  Anything you have to say is void.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 3, 2014)

bullethead said:


> Logic dictates that a God would be perfect. The Bible is chock full of God being disappointed in his own work. It is illogical to think such a God is perfect.



Another supposition based on a lie.  I'm seeing an old trend starting to re-emerge.   We must be getting close to a painful truth, because the caricatures are out in full force and the rest have gone silent.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Another supposition based on a lie.  I'm seeing an old trend starting to re-emerge.   We must be getting close to a painful truth, because the caricatures are out in full force and the rest have gone silent.



So your god isn't perfect, and makes not claims that he is? So who forgives him for his imperfection?


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> And this is a perfect example of where the wheels always seem to fall off discussions with most atheist.  Confronted with the choice of have an intellectually honest discussion and following it no matter where it may lead, many upon seeing where honesty and truth lead choose rather to engage in or introduce deception.
> 
> To answer your question, no it's not logical.  Do you even know why?  Because your caricature of God is a lie.  It's sad really.  You present an lie, portend it represents the truth of what others believe and then mock it.
> 
> ...



The money pieces is ridiculous to bring up...
It is in the bible. It is as clear as other commandments.. although we all know how stupid and secular it is. So stupid and secular that our side loses credibility when it's brought up... Yeah, I can accept that.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Another supposition based on a lie.  I'm seeing an old trend starting to re-emerge.   We must be getting close to a painful truth, because the caricatures are out in full force and the rest have gone silent.





SemperFiDawg said:


> I'm saying that the concept of a supernatural, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and eternal being as a cause of this universe and everything in it is NOT an illogical position.




Which is it???? Omniscient, imo, would imply he would get things right the first time and not create a race of man that would turn wicked, only to wipe them all out.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 3, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> So your god isn't perfect, and makes not claims that he is? So who forgives him for his imperfection?



Ain't got time or inclination for this TXB.   You want to just call it quits now before you go any further down that road?


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I'm seeing an old trend starting to re-emerge.



No... except this is not an OLD trend.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 3, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Which is it???? Omniscient, imo, would imply he would get things right the first time and not create a race of man that would turn wicked, only to wipe them all out.



You want to go back and address 52 before we go any further down this road.  This post didn't?


----------



## 660griz (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Do you in all,honesty not see that you are making a fool of yourself and losing all credibility by doing so.


 No, but, if there is a mirror where you are... 





> Is it too much on your ego to say "There is a logical argument for God."


 Of course not. If there was one. There is no logical argument for God. There is a logical reason for religion. 





> so much so that you must engage in dishonesty to the point of sacrificing your integrity for the sake of your pride?


 Show me where I was dishonest.  


> Don't bother responding.  You've no credibility with me.  Anything you have to say is void.


Like I give a rat's a__!

Isn't it strange how asking questions can stir up such animosity? 

Usually, when I see the claws come out from the holy, it is because they are fighting off reason at all cost. 

“Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves.” 
â€• George Gordon Byron


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 3, 2014)

"It's supernatural" is just a "don't worry about it" response. That is a blanket statement that can be applied to anything... It's like either of the other two As saying, "It's science."


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 3, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> "It's supernatural" is just a "don't worry about it" response. That is a blanket statement that can be applied to anything... It's like either of the other two As saying, "It's science."



OK.  Well I guess I have my answer.  Have a good one.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 3, 2014)

660griz said:


> No, but, if there is a mirror where you are...  Of course not. If there was one. There is no logical argument for God. There is a logical reason for religion.  Show me where I was dishonest.
> 
> Like I give a rat's a__!
> 
> ...



No animosity here brother, just sadness.  Take care.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 3, 2014)

Why is that I can't think of anything to say other than "Kaboom"   tongue in cheek of course....


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 3, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Why is that I can't think of anything to say other than "Kaboom"   tongue in cheek of course....



Yeah go see it if you get a chance.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Another supposition based on a lie.  I'm seeing an old trend starting to re-emerge.   We must be getting close to a painful truth, because the caricatures are out in full force and the rest have gone silent.



Yeah...yet your nonsense,rhetoric and blatant assertions has never stopped.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 3, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Another supposition based on a lie.  I'm seeing an old trend starting to re-emerge.   We must be getting close to a painful truth, because the caricatures are out in full force and the rest have gone silent.



Seriously what does this even mean? Instead of just yammering on and on about things that only sound good in your own mind please go into detail on what in the heck you are talking about.

Where is the lie?
What trend?
What truth?
Who is out in force?
Who is silent?


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 4, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> Only because of your emotions, that you have been indoctrinated that you are so much lower than God (filthy rags, pieces of poop have been used in here), do you think its illogical.
> He loves you.
> sacrificed Jesus
> Jesus's resurrection
> ...



My emotions have little to do with it.
You assume I was indoctrinated. You have no idea.
You also assume that I believe the "filthy rag so much lower than God attitude" (in the way you mean it).

God is not beholden to logic. Logic is a construct of man.

God knows I do not deserve grace, he illogical provides it.

Your other posts make it sound like you understand what logic is, but then you continue to apply logic to God. I don't think you get what I am trying to say.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 4, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Great, so apologetics, pleas step down.



If you don't like it, you could just not read this sub-forum. You do not have the right to ask anyone else to leave.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 4, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> "It's supernatural" is just a "don't worry about it" response. That is a blanket statement that can be applied to anything... It's like either of the other two As saying, "It's science."



No, it is not. The only rule in supernatural is that it is not natural. There are many rules to science. In fact it is a carefully prescribed process that most people do not understand even if they can recite the scientific method.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 4, 2014)

bullethead said:


> Seriously what does this even mean? Instead of just yammering on and on about things that only sound good in your own mind please go into detail on what in the heck you are talking about.
> 
> Where is the lie?
> What trend?
> ...



It means:


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 4, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> My emotions have little to do with it.
> You assume I was indoctrinated. You have no idea.
> You also assume that I believe the "filthy rag so much lower than God attitude" (in the way you mean it).
> 
> ...


I am not applying logic to "God".
I applied logic to actions. 
These actions, regardless of who did them -


> He loves you.
> sacrificed Jesus
> Jesus's resurrection
> provides grace
> opportunity to spend eternity with him


Are, logically, NOT the actions one would do if they felt you didn't deserve them or at least deserve a shot at it.
These actions, regardless of who did them -
Does not love you
sacrificed nothing
resurrected nothing
provides nothing
doesn't want you anywhere around him
Would, logically, be the actions of "someone" who felt you didn't deserve squat or just didn't care..

And what is the difference between -


> you continue to apply logic to God


And you determining -


> he illogically provides it.


To determine God is doing something illogical don't you have to apply logic to God to determine that?


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 4, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> If you don't like it, you could just not read this sub-forum. You do not have the right to ask anyone else to leave.



I have the right to tell anyone pretty much anything I want actually. Thanks


He was the one that said apologetics doesn't work.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 4, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> No, it is not. The only rule in supernatural is that it is not natural. There are many rules to science. In fact it is a carefully prescribed process that most people do not understand even if they can recite the scientific method.



Yes... we know... you're a "scientist"...


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 4, 2014)

Like I said earlier Ted.  Low ceiling


----------



## bullethead (Apr 4, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Like I said earlier Ted.  Low ceiling



It just seems like low ceilings when you are trying to piggy back your giant ego on your invisible buddy's shoulders.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 4, 2014)

bullethead said:


> It just seems like low ceilings when you are trying to piggy back your giant ego on your invisible buddy's shoulders.



Sad.  Just sad.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 4, 2014)

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...nspired-a-central-character-in-gods-not-dead/

Neat article about a person who was the inspiration for one of the movie characters and what led him to Christianity.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 4, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sad.  Just sad.



If it is so sad why do YOU constantly fuel the fire by doing the exact same things then point your finger in disgust?


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 13, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Yes... we know... you're a "scientist"...



I like how you put it in quotes, like you think I am just some whack job. My title at work actually says "scientist", and so does my degree.

Lots of people throw around the word "science", including scientists, but they either didn't understand the lectures, or think everyone else is too dumb to call them out on their assumptions. Oh well, the beat goes on.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 13, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> I am not applying logic to "God".
> I applied logic to actions.
> These actions, regardless of who did them -
> 
> ...



I reckon so, that is a good point. I guess I would have spoken better to say that God is not beholden to logic.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 13, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> I have the right to tell anyone pretty much anything I want actually. Thanks
> 
> 
> He was the one that said apologetics doesn't work.



Fair enough, but you have no authority here (neither do I).


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 14, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> Fair enough, but you have no authority here (neither do I).



Apparently you have the authority to tell people they don't have authority. Just stop now....


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 14, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> I reckon so, that is a good point. I guess I would have spoken better to say that God is not beholden to logic.


That seems so convenient to me.
What would man say if the stories attributed to God were not logical?
"God is not beholden to logic" of course.
Its the catch all for anything and everything that doesn't make sense. Very convenient indeed.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 14, 2014)

Imagination is not beholden to logic.


----------



## Terminal Idiot (Apr 14, 2014)

ted_BSR said:


> God knows I do not deserve grace, he illogical provides it
> .



What do you do in your life that is so bad that you don't deserve grace? Seriously. What in the world are you doing?


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 14, 2014)

Terminal Idiot said:


> What do you do in your life that is so bad that you don't deserve grace? Seriously. What in the world are you doing?



ANY sin separates us from God.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 14, 2014)

TripleXBullies said:


> Apparently you have the authority to tell people they don't have authority. Just stop now....



It doesn't say Moderator under your name (or mine).


----------



## Madman (Apr 21, 2014)

Terminal Idiot said:


> What do you do in your life that is so bad that you don't deserve grace? Seriously. What in the world are you doing?



By its very definition grace is God's unmerited favor towards someone.

I believe this will help answer your question.

Romans 5:9-11

9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.


Jesus is the one who reconciled us to God.   Before I believed that and declared it I was an enemy of God.  That's what I did.

I am not God's enemy any longer.


----------

