Personal experience argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-07-2015, 10:38 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 10:06 AM)jennybee Wrote:  I can see I am not going to change your mind. Dodgy If you want to believe the Bible predicted 1948, you certainly can do that. Thumbsup Just something to think about though: When you have control over what start date you use and what numbers you use and whether or not you are going to add, subtract, multiply, divide them...it is really easy to come out with a desired answer.

The expositors of this idea had no control over:

* When the diaspora began

* When some returned from captivity

* The number seven being the number in the Torah as used for a multiplicand

* The State of Israel coming to pass in 1948 CE

All four of which were firmly in place, as I mentioned, before skeptics questioned diaspora prophecy and before the numbers "added up" for Christian believers.

But perhaps we should talk about a different prophecy? The one I referenced where Jesus's death was predicted for (from memory) April 4, 29 AD? That's a hot topic or it should be--it could be a smoking gun for trusting Jesus for salvation.

If you can't see (or don't want to see) how Jeffrey and Missler manipulated dates, numbers, and passages--I don't think there is anything else I could possibly tell you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like jennybee's post
24-07-2015, 10:41 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 10:26 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 11:38 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Emoticon is fitting for where you go: There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out.

Such "threatening" with hell is strangely relaxing. Maybe it's why believers do this so often? Consider

I talk about Hell very little. So do most believers I know. But it's normally brought to the fore by atheists as one of their canards/sticking points/stumbling blocks over which they themselves stumble. Did I bring it up this time or did an atheist?

You talk about Hell very little? That's great. Theists I know talk about it often, so what is exactly your point?

Also this was a joke. Maybe I should highlight it somehow so you wouldn't take it too seriously?

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2015, 10:43 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 10:38 AM)jennybee Wrote:  
(24-07-2015 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  The expositors of this idea had no control over:

* When the diaspora began

* When some returned from captivity

* The number seven being the number in the Torah as used for a multiplicand

* The State of Israel coming to pass in 1948 CE

All four of which were firmly in place, as I mentioned, before skeptics questioned diaspora prophecy and before the numbers "added up" for Christian believers.

But perhaps we should talk about a different prophecy? The one I referenced where Jesus's death was predicted for (from memory) April 4, 29 AD? That's a hot topic or it should be--it could be a smoking gun for trusting Jesus for salvation.

If you can't see (or don't want to see) how Jeffrey and Missler manipulated dates, numbers, and passages--I don't think there is anything else I could possibly tell you.

There is nothing than you can say to change mind of someone convinced that he found THE TRUTH. I'm surprised that you still bother.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Szuchow's post
24-07-2015, 11:28 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 10:29 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 11:46 AM)julep Wrote:  Those "sacrifices" that Adam and Eve taught their children to do led to the first murder, according to your book. Just sayin'.

I'm not really worried about being judged by your god as ethically deficient, however. I have never made a heinous personal choice. I've never destroyed civilizations with fire and flood or told my followers to commit genocide, for example. Actions like that are heinous, I agree.

Interesting point, except I thought it was that Cain not giving a quality sacrifice and anger against his brother's holiness and jealousy led to his murderous intent. Without sacrifice, the story is of... an atheist (?) or a mainline, dead believer (?) killing a believer... Confused

So you're not exceptionally ethically deficient. Are you perfect?

You were the one who contrasted Adam and Eve's ethics, choices, and childrearing policies with the "heinous" ones made by atheists, and you were the one lauding the sacrifices. I just connected the dots.

And of course Cain isn't presented by the Genesis narrative as an atheist or a "mainline" (LOL) believer. Cain is, however, the third person in the Bible to trip the wire on a trap set by angry-dad god. He gave god the wrong present, so god humiliated him, knowing (omniscient) what would happen.

I'm not perfect, just more ethical than your god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like julep's post
24-07-2015, 11:33 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 11:28 AM)julep Wrote:  I'm not perfect, just more ethical than your god.

It's not hard. One could - jockingly - say that Mao, Stalin or Hitler were more ethical. Neither of them killed nearly all humans in the world.\

Seriously though what else can one expect form tribal god?

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Szuchow's post
24-07-2015, 03:10 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 10:22 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 09:59 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Because that monotheistic crowd who believes that story often contradict their ideas by how foolishly they label the scenarios of what occurred in that story. As well as some of the other Genesis/Exodus stories.

Again, I've pointed this out so many times you clearly still don't understand something. When one is talking in a hypothetical about a theistic principal or scenario you don't believe in, that person may still talk as if in a way they were accepting of the religious idea of evil/good even without believing it. It's called being logically able to examine the mental action of the opposition, you know like writing a literature paper or doing a debate. It's a simple skill that's not hard to discern for high shcoolers.

No, my point was how often atheists prefer abstract theology to dealing with their sin. I dealt with my sin in large part when I trusted Jesus Christ for salvation.

Atheists do not share your concept of sin. There is nothing to deal with.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2015, 03:27 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 03:10 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(24-07-2015 10:22 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  No, my point was how often atheists prefer abstract theology to dealing with their sin. I dealt with my sin in large part when I trusted Jesus Christ for salvation.

Atheists do not share your concept of sin. There is nothing to deal with.

Sin is a masochistic invention designed to distract and absolve Q from recognizing and remedying the fact that he is just another asshole.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like GirlyMan's post
25-07-2015, 08:58 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 10:43 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(24-07-2015 10:38 AM)jennybee Wrote:  If you can't see (or don't want to see) how Jeffrey and Missler manipulated dates, numbers, and passages--I don't think there is anything else I could possibly tell you.

There is nothing than you can say to change mind of someone convinced that he found THE TRUTH. I'm surprised that you still bother.
Likewise.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2015, 09:01 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 11:28 AM)julep Wrote:  
(24-07-2015 10:29 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Interesting point, except I thought it was that Cain not giving a quality sacrifice and anger against his brother's holiness and jealousy led to his murderous intent. Without sacrifice, the story is of... an atheist (?) or a mainline, dead believer (?) killing a believer... Confused

So you're not exceptionally ethically deficient. Are you perfect?

You were the one who contrasted Adam and Eve's ethics, choices, and childrearing policies with the "heinous" ones made by atheists, and you were the one lauding the sacrifices. I just connected the dots.

And of course Cain isn't presented by the Genesis narrative as an atheist or a "mainline" (LOL) believer. Cain is, however, the third person in the Bible to trip the wire on a trap set by angry-dad god. He gave god the wrong present, so god humiliated him, knowing (omniscient) what would happen.

I'm not perfect, just more ethical than your god.
There were two forces at work during the big bang or creation as we know it. With that being said; God, being all the good of creation had little to do with Cain's sins. It was internal corruption from evil. The other building block is you will
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2015, 09:03 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(24-07-2015 03:10 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(24-07-2015 10:22 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  No, my point was how often atheists prefer abstract theology to dealing with their sin. I dealt with my sin in large part when I trusted Jesus Christ for salvation.

Atheists do not share your concept of sin. There is nothing to deal with.
That is seemingly because they don't grasp that all is the same and changeable for good or bad.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: