A Skype conversation with a Theist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-06-2012, 01:41 PM
A Skype conversation with a Theist
This is after a few minutes of a conversation on the SWTOR MMO. I wish I could have that, but SWTOR doesn't keep logs. Anyways, here it is. To clarify in the beginning, he thought that the Dead Sea had nothing flowing into it, and thus Noah's flood caused it. You may want to read the articles, but I think we clarify what we're speaking about rather clearly.


[10:51:34 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ay



[10:51:51 AM] Tim Finnegan: Tim Finnegan has shared contact details with Nathan vanCuylenburg.



[10:52:09 AM] Tim Finnegan: Hey



[10:52:39 AM] Tim Finnegan: That Answers in Genisis article you sent me to is refuted here. I'm reading it myself. Look for the other 5 parts for it to address the full 6 arguments stated.



[10:52:40 AM] Tim Finnegan: http://geochristian.wordpress.com/2009/0...is-part-1/



[10:54:26 AM] Tim Finnegan: As for it not having any water sources flowing into it, go here and move to the "Geography" section. A portion of the Jordan River fills the Dead Sea as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea#Geography



[10:55:46 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d740101.htm



[10:55:56 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: this is the page i was telling you about



[10:56:13 AM] Tim Finnegan: Be sure to read my articles as well. i'm going to your now



[10:56:17 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: i will



[11:01:49 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: to make sure im clear so you don't get confused, there are some aspects of the bible where people are looking to prove it in ways that will not ever make any sense. as for actual interpretations, many people believe that the bible needs to be read as 100% literal and i do not agree with that, since there are poems in it, it doesnt make sense to take a poem as literal, for example.



[11:02:43 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: personally, i do not believe in a worldly flood, but a flood of their known world, which would be the mesopotamian area



[11:04:03 AM] Tim Finnegan: The bible was taken as fully literal for hundreds of years until science began disproving it. As it did, its literal views have shifted to metiphorical views as science began to disprove the document more and more. If you had questioned the validity of the gospel in persay, 1000-1200, you would have been rediculed



[11:04:27 AM] Tim Finnegan: documents*



[11:05:15 AM] Tim Finnegan: Only when science has stepped in and outright told them they're wrong, have Christians been forced to deny what they had taken as truth for so long.



[11:05:51 AM] Tim Finnegan: Anyways, back to your article. I'll address it in a sec



[11:05:55 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ok



[11:13:32 AM] Tim Finnegan: The thing about the article from your man with the Ph.D, is that his -ONLY- source for proving the bible -IS- the bible and what's written within it. The only accounts he's using to prove it, are accounts -GIVEN- by it.



[11:17:36 AM] Tim Finnegan: D'you see how that doesn't work? I could write any story that takes place within that era and do the -EXACT SAME THING-



[11:18:01 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q9_hist...bible.html



[11:18:13 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: this provides some outside proof of parts of the bible



[11:18:50 AM] Tim Finnegan: brb a sec and then I'll go ahead and read it



[11:19:03 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ok



[11:26:05 AM] Tim Finnegan: The first portion of your next article is stating that because they've found King David's palace by relying on information in the bible. Archaelologists found Troy through the stories of the Ancient Greeks. Does this mean Paganism is correct?



[11:26:26 AM] Tim Finnegan: that the bible is true because theyve found*



[11:27:07 AM] Tim Finnegan: Troy was listed in the Oddyssey, which was -FILLED- with accounts of entities from the Pagan belief system



[11:28:44 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: no, the woman used what the bible said about where the palace was located in relation to the area helped her find it



[11:29:04 AM] Tim Finnegan: They did the same in finding Troy.



[11:29:22 AM] Tim Finnegan: And that is what I'm trying to say.



[11:30:30 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: that isnt making sense, the used the bible to help her find where it was, that shows that the bible was an accurate historical text for the geographical locations



[11:30:37 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: she* used



[11:31:12 AM] Tim Finnegan: And they used the myths of the Greeks in order to locate the lost city of Troy. Does this mean that the entirety of the Greek Myths are true?



[11:31:26 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: they have truth in them



[11:35:04 AM] Tim Finnegan: Same with the Bible. They have some truth in them, but does that all the accounts of Cyclopses or Achilles, the man invincible except for a single spot in his heel? Because King David was found to be an actual King, does this mean that a magic man was going around and committing miracles wherever he went and then arose from the dead after being brutally murdered? They've found historical truths in a great deal of religious texts and myths. The ancient people loved to include Kings or very popular people into their myths. Egypt considered every one of its Kings to be a God. We know those kings existed. Does that mean their accounts are true?



[11:35:12 AM] Tim Finnegan: that mean*



[11:35:22 AM] Tim Finnegan: I seem to be leaving words out while I type. Dunno how that's happening



[11:35:26 AM] Tim Finnegan: Words and phrases in fact



[11:36:22 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: it means that the could be true because we dont know of any way to say they're false



[11:37:37 AM] Tim Finnegan: So you're saying it's possible that Cyclopses, Peguses, and minotaurs may have existed, even though we have found absolutely -NO- evidence of them in the fossil record?



[11:41:29 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: you find a right bone and stick it on a horse and you could say that unicorns are real. but no, im saying that religion oftentimes is guilty until proven innocent. completely refuted right off the bat. when you said in the chat the bible is not true, it says the planets came before the plants. so is that not true? of course it is! whether or not the entirety of the bible can be proven does not automatically mean its wrong. for example, prove to me you live in the states. you cant unless i'm physically there with you.



[11:42:25 AM] Tim Finnegan: Actually, I can. Gimme one second



[11:55:20 AM] Tim Finnegan: Damn. Can't find the web page I was looking for so i can't prove I'm in the states, but whatever. Now to address what you just said. Let me give you an analogy. Let's say that a man in ancient egypt picked up a piece of paper and wrote about a magical camel that sprouted wings and could fly. On this piece of paper, he referenced -MANY- places and people that were in existence at the time, stored that piece of paper in a box and the buried the box. Hundreds of years later, archaelogists dig up the box and find the written account. D'you think they'd take it as true because of the historical references, or simply label it to be irrational and impossible bullshit? A man goes around magically healing people that are supposedly sick in the first place because of his crimes(Jesus resolved them of their illnesses by resolving them of their sins)? Scientifically impossible. And arc that is written to be smaller than the size of the Titanic fits 2 of each animal in the world, and then saild for 40 days until the flood subsides, and when it was finished, the man that built the arc comitted incest(BEcause there was nobody on board other than his family) and repopulated the Earth? Portions of that are physically impossible and uttery rediculous. A magical being that manifests itself in 3 different forms, yet is still considered one God, has always existed and creates the universe out of boredom? REDICULOUS. If Christianity had died out in the ancient times, its stories would be considered as nothing but mythology and waved aside. A rational mind doesn't buy into all that. All of this is the Christian Equivalent to Greek, Egyptian, and Persian mythology. It just held on.



[11:56:13 AM] Tim Finnegan: their crimes*



[11:56:36 AM] Tim Finnegan: I probably typoed alot in there. if something in there doesnt seem to make sense, it may be because of a typo. Tell me and I'll correct it



[11:58:11 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: that's fine. now i have a question. can you make mass out of absolutly nothing



[11:58:14 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ?*



[11:58:28 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: absolutely*



[11:58:59 AM] Tim Finnegan: Allow me to link you to a writing of my own. One moment. It summarizes my thoughts and I posted it on a forum I hang out on.



[11:59:12 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ok



[11:59:23 AM] Tim Finnegan: http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-something This is everything I wrote on the subject



[12:03:01 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: If you don't mind, I think you should try that. Make a steel box and vacuum away all the air in it. In 20-30 years, what will you have?



[12:05:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: I was referring to infite nothing. If it was within a box, then something will have already have been in existence, and without air, there is still something within the box. What I'm talking about a time when there was -ABSOLUTELY NOTHING-. Even if there was no air in the box, the laws of physics exerted onto the box would still apply to the emptyness inside. On top of that, space is something. Space is what generates gravity. Empty space is proven to be a bendable and twistable entity.



[12:06:01 PM] Tim Finnegan: infinite*



[12:07:01 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: I can refer you to the argument against christianity, prove it to me.



[12:07:31 PM] Tim Finnegan: Proof that space is a bendable twistable entity?



[12:07:52 PM] Tim Finnegan: Sure. I'll go ahead some science that says so



[12:08:02 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: no, the empitiness



[12:08:10 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: i agree with the bedning of space



[12:08:14 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: bending*



[12:08:35 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: emptiness*



[12:09:11 PM] Tim Finnegan: emptiness is still something. Take away emptiness. Anything, ANYTHING AT ALL that pops into your mind, take it away.
That is the kind of nothingness I'm speaking of.



[12:10:16 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: then prove the big bang happened.



[12:11:43 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: brb



[12:14:57 PM] Tim Finnegan: Allow me to explain the true nature of the Big Bang(I didnt understand it when I wrote that portion, but it doesnt disprove
what I said). The Big Bang didn't label the creation of all the matter in the universe. It wasn't even an explosion. The title "Big Bang" was given to the theory by people trying to redicule it. The big bang is simply an expansion of all the matter and energy in the universe, from a singular point. We -KNOW- the universe is expanding because we can record the movements of galaxies and the universe(Which I'll have to look up for you). The creation of the universe's matter and energy, and its expansions, are too different things. And if you're going to ask me to prove the Big Bang occured, I am now going to ask you:



[12:15:07 PM] Tim Finnegan: Prove that God exists, and has always existed.



[12:20:38 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: I understand that I can not prove that God does exist. I would ask you then, prove that He doesn't. neither of us
can do either. To know God exist you have to be willing to the idea that christianity is true, and even then, you can only prove it for yourself. If you really want to know whether or not God is real then I would like you to pray each day for a week asking him to show himself to you. You need to have an open mind when you ask him. If He does not answer you, then all you did was talk to yourself a little bit each day for a week. Would you be willing to do that?



[12:23:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: I've tried prayer plenty of times in my life. It simply does not work. If it did work, why would all of those starving African countries that put great amounts of effort into prayer and use their faith as a major becan of hope, starve?



[12:24:47 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: because then what would the role of people be if God did everything?



[12:25:14 PM] Tim Finnegan: If he wants to give people a role, then why answer prayers at all?



[12:25:43 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: because he wants us to do what we can, when we are not capable, then he steps in.



[12:26:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: These starving Africans are not capable of providing food for themselves, and those that are trying to assist them, are stretched too thin. Do you not consider this to be the perfect scenario for him to step in?



[12:28:22 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: We here in North America could easily fix starvation there but we decide to spend our money on other things. So maybe by getting us to help them, hes fixing and helping us in our selfishness



[12:29:47 PM] Tim Finnegan: Well it's obvious that that's not going to happen any time soon. The world is too focused on their own problems, and if the Christian God was merciful, and all-loving, then why would he have this mindset of leaving humanity to fend for itself in order to fix its selfishness, and if he hates selfishness, why give us the ability to be selfish at all?



[12:30:27 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: "If you love something, set it free" He is giving us free will.



[12:30:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: And then he leaves these humans to die when they want nothing more than for him to help them.



[12:31:48 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: all i ask is you try praying just for a week and see what happens. I have to go now, thank you for the conversation. You are a well spoken individual. good bye!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2012, 01:46 PM
RE: A Skype conversation with a Theist
(28-06-2012 01:41 PM)pppgggr Wrote:  This is after a few minutes of a conversation on the SWTOR MMO. I wish I could have that, but SWTOR doesn't keep logs. Anyways, here it is. To clarify in the beginning, he thought that the Dead Sea had nothing flowing into it, and thus Noah's flood caused it. You may want to read the articles, but I think we clarify what we're speaking about rather clearly.


[10:51:34 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ay



[10:51:51 AM] Tim Finnegan: Tim Finnegan has shared contact details with Nathan vanCuylenburg.



[10:52:09 AM] Tim Finnegan: Hey



[10:52:39 AM] Tim Finnegan: That Answers in Genisis article you sent me to is refuted here. I'm reading it myself. Look for the other 5 parts for it to address the full 6 arguments stated.



[10:52:40 AM] Tim Finnegan: http://geochristian.wordpress.com/2009/0...is-part-1/



[10:54:26 AM] Tim Finnegan: As for it not having any water sources flowing into it, go here and move to the "Geography" section. A portion of the Jordan River fills the Dead Sea as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea#Geography



[10:55:46 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d740101.htm



[10:55:56 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: this is the page i was telling you about



[10:56:13 AM] Tim Finnegan: Be sure to read my articles as well. i'm going to your now



[10:56:17 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: i will



[11:01:49 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: to make sure im clear so you don't get confused, there are some aspects of the bible where people are looking to prove it in ways that will not ever make any sense. as for actual interpretations, many people believe that the bible needs to be read as 100% literal and i do not agree with that, since there are poems in it, it doesnt make sense to take a poem as literal, for example.



[11:02:43 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: personally, i do not believe in a worldly flood, but a flood of their known world, which would be the mesopotamian area



[11:04:03 AM] Tim Finnegan: The bible was taken as fully literal for hundreds of years until science began disproving it. As it did, its literal views have shifted to metiphorical views as science began to disprove the document more and more. If you had questioned the validity of the gospel in persay, 1000-1200, you would have been rediculed



[11:04:27 AM] Tim Finnegan: documents*



[11:05:15 AM] Tim Finnegan: Only when science has stepped in and outright told them they're wrong, have Christians been forced to deny what they had taken as truth for so long.



[11:05:51 AM] Tim Finnegan: Anyways, back to your article. I'll address it in a sec



[11:05:55 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ok



[11:13:32 AM] Tim Finnegan: The thing about the article from your man with the Ph.D, is that his -ONLY- source for proving the bible -IS- the bible and what's written within it. The only accounts he's using to prove it, are accounts -GIVEN- by it.



[11:17:36 AM] Tim Finnegan: D'you see how that doesn't work? I could write any story that takes place within that era and do the -EXACT SAME THING-



[11:18:01 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q9_hist...bible.html



[11:18:13 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: this provides some outside proof of parts of the bible



[11:18:50 AM] Tim Finnegan: brb a sec and then I'll go ahead and read it



[11:19:03 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ok



[11:26:05 AM] Tim Finnegan: The first portion of your next article is stating that because they've found King David's palace by relying on information in the bible. Archaelologists found Troy through the stories of the Ancient Greeks. Does this mean Paganism is correct?



[11:26:26 AM] Tim Finnegan: that the bible is true because theyve found*



[11:27:07 AM] Tim Finnegan: Troy was listed in the Oddyssey, which was -FILLED- with accounts of entities from the Pagan belief system



[11:28:44 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: no, the woman used what the bible said about where the palace was located in relation to the area helped her find it



[11:29:04 AM] Tim Finnegan: They did the same in finding Troy.



[11:29:22 AM] Tim Finnegan: And that is what I'm trying to say.



[11:30:30 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: that isnt making sense, the used the bible to help her find where it was, that shows that the bible was an accurate historical text for the geographical locations



[11:30:37 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: she* used



[11:31:12 AM] Tim Finnegan: And they used the myths of the Greeks in order to locate the lost city of Troy. Does this mean that the entirety of the Greek Myths are true?



[11:31:26 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: they have truth in them



[11:35:04 AM] Tim Finnegan: Same with the Bible. They have some truth in them, but does that all the accounts of Cyclopses or Achilles, the man invincible except for a single spot in his heel? Because King David was found to be an actual King, does this mean that a magic man was going around and committing miracles wherever he went and then arose from the dead after being brutally murdered? They've found historical truths in a great deal of religious texts and myths. The ancient people loved to include Kings or very popular people into their myths. Egypt considered every one of its Kings to be a God. We know those kings existed. Does that mean their accounts are true?



[11:35:12 AM] Tim Finnegan: that mean*



[11:35:22 AM] Tim Finnegan: I seem to be leaving words out while I type. Dunno how that's happening



[11:35:26 AM] Tim Finnegan: Words and phrases in fact



[11:36:22 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: it means that the could be true because we dont know of any way to say they're false



[11:37:37 AM] Tim Finnegan: So you're saying it's possible that Cyclopses, Peguses, and minotaurs may have existed, even though we have found absolutely -NO- evidence of them in the fossil record?



[11:41:29 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: you find a right bone and stick it on a horse and you could say that unicorns are real. but no, im saying that religion oftentimes is guilty until proven innocent. completely refuted right off the bat. when you said in the chat the bible is not true, it says the planets came before the plants. so is that not true? of course it is! whether or not the entirety of the bible can be proven does not automatically mean its wrong. for example, prove to me you live in the states. you cant unless i'm physically there with you.



[11:42:25 AM] Tim Finnegan: Actually, I can. Gimme one second



[11:55:20 AM] Tim Finnegan: Damn. Can't find the web page I was looking for so i can't prove I'm in the states, but whatever. Now to address what you just said. Let me give you an analogy. Let's say that a man in ancient egypt picked up a piece of paper and wrote about a magical camel that sprouted wings and could fly. On this piece of paper, he referenced -MANY- places and people that were in existence at the time, stored that piece of paper in a box and the buried the box. Hundreds of years later, archaelogists dig up the box and find the written account. D'you think they'd take it as true because of the historical references, or simply label it to be irrational and impossible bullshit? A man goes around magically healing people that are supposedly sick in the first place because of his crimes(Jesus resolved them of their illnesses by resolving them of their sins)? Scientifically impossible. And arc that is written to be smaller than the size of the Titanic fits 2 of each animal in the world, and then saild for 40 days until the flood subsides, and when it was finished, the man that built the arc comitted incest(BEcause there was nobody on board other than his family) and repopulated the Earth? Portions of that are physically impossible and uttery rediculous. A magical being that manifests itself in 3 different forms, yet is still considered one God, has always existed and creates the universe out of boredom? REDICULOUS. If Christianity had died out in the ancient times, its stories would be considered as nothing but mythology and waved aside. A rational mind doesn't buy into all that. All of this is the Christian Equivalent to Greek, Egyptian, and Persian mythology. It just held on.



[11:56:13 AM] Tim Finnegan: their crimes*



[11:56:36 AM] Tim Finnegan: I probably typoed alot in there. if something in there doesnt seem to make sense, it may be because of a typo. Tell me and I'll correct it



[11:58:11 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: that's fine. now i have a question. can you make mass out of absolutly nothing



[11:58:14 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ?*



[11:58:28 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: absolutely*



[11:58:59 AM] Tim Finnegan: Allow me to link you to a writing of my own. One moment. It summarizes my thoughts and I posted it on a forum I hang out on.



[11:59:12 AM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: ok



[11:59:23 AM] Tim Finnegan: http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-something This is everything I wrote on the subject



[12:03:01 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: If you don't mind, I think you should try that. Make a steel box and vacuum away all the air in it. In 20-30 years, what will you have?



[12:05:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: I was referring to infite nothing. If it was within a box, then something will have already have been in existence, and without air, there is still something within the box. What I'm talking about a time when there was -ABSOLUTELY NOTHING-. Even if there was no air in the box, the laws of physics exerted onto the box would still apply to the emptyness inside. On top of that, space is something. Space is what generates gravity. Empty space is proven to be a bendable and twistable entity.



[12:06:01 PM] Tim Finnegan: infinite*



[12:07:01 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: I can refer you to the argument against christianity, prove it to me.



[12:07:31 PM] Tim Finnegan: Proof that space is a bendable twistable entity?



[12:07:52 PM] Tim Finnegan: Sure. I'll go ahead some science that says so



[12:08:02 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: no, the empitiness



[12:08:10 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: i agree with the bedning of space



[12:08:14 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: bending*



[12:08:35 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: emptiness*



[12:09:11 PM] Tim Finnegan: emptiness is still something. Take away emptiness. Anything, ANYTHING AT ALL that pops into your mind, take it away.
That is the kind of nothingness I'm speaking of.



[12:10:16 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: then prove the big bang happened.



[12:11:43 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: brb



[12:14:57 PM] Tim Finnegan: Allow me to explain the true nature of the Big Bang(I didnt understand it when I wrote that portion, but it doesnt disprove
what I said). The Big Bang didn't label the creation of all the matter in the universe. It wasn't even an explosion. The title "Big Bang" was given to the theory by people trying to redicule it. The big bang is simply an expansion of all the matter and energy in the universe, from a singular point. We -KNOW- the universe is expanding because we can record the movements of galaxies and the universe(Which I'll have to look up for you). The creation of the universe's matter and energy, and its expansions, are too different things. And if you're going to ask me to prove the Big Bang occured, I am now going to ask you:



[12:15:07 PM] Tim Finnegan: Prove that God exists, and has always existed.



[12:20:38 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: I understand that I can not prove that God does exist. I would ask you then, prove that He doesn't. neither of us
can do either. To know God exist you have to be willing to the idea that christianity is true, and even then, you can only prove it for yourself. If you really want to know whether or not God is real then I would like you to pray each day for a week asking him to show himself to you. You need to have an open mind when you ask him. If He does not answer you, then all you did was talk to yourself a little bit each day for a week. Would you be willing to do that?



[12:23:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: I've tried prayer plenty of times in my life. It simply does not work. If it did work, why would all of those starving African countries that put great amounts of effort into prayer and use their faith as a major becan of hope, starve?



[12:24:47 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: because then what would the role of people be if God did everything?



[12:25:14 PM] Tim Finnegan: If he wants to give people a role, then why answer prayers at all?



[12:25:43 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: because he wants us to do what we can, when we are not capable, then he steps in.



[12:26:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: These starving Africans are not capable of providing food for themselves, and those that are trying to assist them, are stretched too thin. Do you not consider this to be the perfect scenario for him to step in?



[12:28:22 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: We here in North America could easily fix starvation there but we decide to spend our money on other things. So maybe by getting us to help them, hes fixing and helping us in our selfishness



[12:29:47 PM] Tim Finnegan: Well it's obvious that that's not going to happen any time soon. The world is too focused on their own problems, and if the Christian God was merciful, and all-loving, then why would he have this mindset of leaving humanity to fend for itself in order to fix its selfishness, and if he hates selfishness, why give us the ability to be selfish at all?



[12:30:27 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: "If you love something, set it free" He is giving us free will.



[12:30:56 PM] Tim Finnegan: And then he leaves these humans to die when they want nothing more than for him to help them.



[12:31:48 PM] Nathan vanCuylenburg: all i ask is you try praying just for a week and see what happens. I have to go now, thank you for the conversation. You are a well spoken individual. good bye!
Da fuq did I just read?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
28-06-2012, 02:02 PM
RE: A Skype conversation with a Theist
Who is who?

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2012, 02:14 PM (This post was last modified: 28-06-2012 02:22 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: A Skype conversation with a Theist
(28-06-2012 02:02 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Who is who?
Nathan vanCuylenburg -> theist

Tim Finnegan -> atheist

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2012, 02:19 PM
RE: A Skype conversation with a Theist
(28-06-2012 02:14 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(28-06-2012 02:02 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Who is who?
Nathan vanCuylenburg -> atheist

Tim Finnegan -> theist
I'm Tim Finnegan....And I'm the atheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes pppgggr's post
28-06-2012, 02:22 PM
RE: A Skype conversation with a Theist
(28-06-2012 02:19 PM)pppgggr Wrote:  
(28-06-2012 02:14 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  Nathan vanCuylenburg -> atheist

Tim Finnegan -> theist
I'm Tim Finnegan....And I'm the atheist.
Oh my bad, I'll edit my post to prevent confusion.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2012, 02:24 PM
RE: A Skype conversation with a Theist
(28-06-2012 02:19 PM)pppgggr Wrote:  
(28-06-2012 02:14 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  Nathan vanCuylenburg -> atheist

Tim Finnegan -> theist
I'm Tim Finnegan....And I'm the atheist.

Ahh ok.

As an FYI, though, this statement:

Quote:[11:04:03 AM] Tim Finnegan: The bible was taken as fully literal for hundreds of years until science began disproving it. As it did, its literal views have shifted to metiphorical views as science began to disprove the document more and more. If you had questioned the validity of the gospel in persay, 1000-1200, you would have been rediculed

Isn't true. Taking scripture literally is relatively new. In context of what you two are discussing, I'm talking about Genesis and such. Mainstream acceptance of much of Genesis being taken literally didn't come around until the mid 1800s with the rise of dispensationalism.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: