Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In that case the answer is I felt he loved me that way. That is the only way I was unafraid enough to let go.
Once you know that God IS love, you can't help but know that all the other nonsense in the primitive and superstitious beliefs of our ignorant ancestors is just stupid and irrational.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth
You felt that [the triune-Jesus/Bible] God loved YOU with all of It's emotions, thoughts, and identity? Well, I can tell why it was easy for you to depart from the false Bible god: You NEVER KNEW Him!
Once you got to know the Bible god you must have gotten to realize how fake, weak, violent, aggressive, and evil it is variously portrayed within the boundaries of the particular cage and idol.
Clearly, you are focused on all the stupid irrationality in the ancient beliefs of our ignorant ancestors and refuse even to consider the true nature of God revealed by Christ. Sad, very sad!
Once you know that God IS love, you can't help but know that all the other nonsense in the primitive and superstitious beliefs of our ignorant ancestors is just stupid and irrational.
Clearly, you are focused on all the stupid irrationality in the ancient beliefs of our ignorant ancestors and refuse even to consider the true nature of God revealed by Christ. Sad, very sad!
What, are you working for Trump now? His third-grade-level sign offs would never work on me. You can consider and imagine any believed true natures revealed by any proposed kings that you want to. I find that to be the sad part. I never made up a "Christ" spirit that was better and outside the descriptions that the New Testament gives, sorry. I see no need to either, since I don't believe in the idea of kingdoms anyway.
What, are you working for Trump now? His third-grade-level sign offs would never work on me. You can consider and imagine any believed true natures revealed by any proposed kings that you want to. I find that to be the sad part. I never made up a "Christ" spirit that was better and outside the descriptions that the New Testament gives, sorry. I see no need to either, since I don't believe in the idea of kingdoms anyway.
what he is saying is that we all know a dude didn't die, wake up, and fly away. There isn't any omni dude running around pointing fingers and tossing lighting bolts around. proving things that are not valid anymore is sillyness.
So now what do we do?
We still should describe the universe and its workings to the best of our abilities. If we start warping "how the universe works" around a belief statement then we look awful religious
The Christ figure "outside the NT" you point to is just a reference to a good person just trying to teach that literal religion is bad. I don't see why that is a bad notion myself. In fact, claiming there are not that type of people is wrong.
Then, a minor point, there is nothing we do that the universe isn't doing. I mean if you can get us around that notion, by all means, do it.
I have another question: does anyone ever actually change his/her mind based on someone's post here?
I've seen it happen on another forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Once you know that God IS love, you can't help but know that all the other nonsense in the primitive and superstitious beliefs of our ignorant ancestors is just stupid and irrational.
Would that be the same ignorant ancestors that believed that BibleJesus existed?
I have a question: who decides who the winner is? Or does this just drone on and on until everyone is tired of the topic, goes back to their various lives, until the next clever poster comes along and says, hey, let's have a debate about god?
I have another question: does anyone ever actually change his/her mind based on someone's post here?
That's a good question, so I trust the mods will permit a digression.
Very rarely. There have been a couple who changed their minds (Northsouth - once a Fundy, now one of our stoutest atheist apologists -if she's still here) and one whose name I forget, but he started a thread to apologize for being such a stiffnecked asshat while a theist (we said there was nothing to apologize for).
But they probably did it themselves through questioning, anyway. And that's the point. Half (guesstimation) of the atheists used to be believers, but they deconverted through doubt and question. And that's what sites like this do - ask the questions, assist the doubting and provide the answers.
Who wins? That's why I would never want to debate a theist without a judge and scoring -system (one point to the Other side for an evasion, a fallacy or a personal) as they NEVER admit they are wrong even when confronted with lockdown proof (1) The browser must judge who has the best case, and (if the stats on the rise of irreligion are to be trusted) we are winning and have been over the last couple of decades.
(1) the best example of that was a debate on the site of the 2nd Temple - I proved conclusively that it could not be on mount Ophel, but the opposition (admittedly it was Eusebius who was the epitome of theist denial) refused to accept even this really unimportant win. It would have smashed his faith in his own God -inspired rightness.
Who wins? That's why I would never want to debate a theist without a judge and scoring -system (one point to the Other side for an evasion, a fallacy or a personal) as they NEVER admit they are wrong even when confronted with lockdown proof (1) The browser must judge who has the best case, and (if the stats on the rise of irreligion are to be trusted) we are winning and have been over the last couple of decades.
Finding a judge who could monitor this debate and declare a winner would be a tautology - the ability to define the attributes of a truly unbiased judge would in effect be the definition of the essence of the debate itself and once that is known, the answer is clear and the debate is moot. In a sense, two orthogonal concepts are being pitted against each other: deductive logic vs. belief. How can you debate which is superior? It is like a physicist debating which is more important: time or space?
Finding a judge who could monitor this debate and declare a winner would be a tautology - the ability to define the attributes of a truly unbiased judge would in effect be the definition of the essence of the debate itself and once that is known, the answer is clear and the debate is moot. In a sense, two orthogonal concepts are being pitted against each other: deductive logic vs. belief. How can you debate which is superior? It is like a physicist debating which is more important: time or space?
It's like science - bias is irrelevant - there are rules. Making a claim and failing to back it up - point against. Informal fallacy - point against, 'Evidence' that turns out to be incorrect -point against. The Judge would be there to be the one to point to the score, because the Theist apologists will simply ignore it.
I take your point about the result being obvious, bt the fact is that I don't feel you can rely on the viewers to see the 'obvious' which is why I point out where wrong or irrational posts are wrong or irrational. Just to remove all doubt.
You musings on the philosophy of debate are rather irrelevant. Where a clear point is not made (or lost) no point is scored either way. Here of course you do need a judge, and I suppose you need someone who is accepted by both sides as giving a fair judgement
what he is saying is that we all know a dude didn't die, wake up, and fly away. There isn't any omni dude running around pointing fingers and tossing lighting bolts around. proving things that are not valid anymore is sillyness....
Just perhaps to get back to topic and to show why I will not let you speak for atheism (or any other atheist) - just HOW do you know Jesus didn't die and resurrect and that there isn't a god doing stuff? Using slightly mocking terms proves nothing.
That these are miraculous claims do not of themselves disprove it. There are arguments against, but do you know them? Let's see.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-01-2017 at 07:56 AM..
[...]
The Christ figure "outside the NT" you point to is just a reference to a good person just trying to teach that literal religion is bad. I don't see why that is a bad notion myself. In fact, claiming there are not that type of people is wrong.
Then, a minor point, there is nothing we do that the universe isn't doing. I mean if you can get us around that notion, by all means, do it.
You do know that Christ means "anointed" [as king], right?
There can be as many spiritual people running around calling themselves "real" Christians criticizing religious fundamentalism as there want to be. I still would not subscribe to "Intelligent Design," "Deism," "Panentheism," "uberliberal Christianity," etc.
I know many people would, but I wouldn't. I'm not sure what to say, or why I would need to say anything, about your minor point.
You do know that Christ means "anointed" [as king], right?
There can be as many spiritual people running around calling themselves "real" Christians criticizing religious fundamentalism as there want to be. I still would not subscribe to "Intelligent Design," "Deism," "Panentheism," "uberliberal Christianity," etc.
I know many people would, but I wouldn't. I'm not sure what to say, or why I would need to say anything, about your minor point.
the why is easy. But you didn't even answer the question "can you show me anything we do that the universe isn't ultimately doing". its a simple question.
how you feel about it is a minor point. Personal opinions are a dime dozen to me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Once you know that God IS love, you can't help but know that all the other nonsense in the primitive and superstitious beliefs of our ignorant ancestors is just stupid and irrational.
