Community > General Religion Chat

Previous 1 2 … 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next

Topic: the christian god ... loving or evil ??
Peter_Pan69 Joined Sun 08/23/09 Posts: 2781	Fri 06/24/11 08:59 PM Edited by Peter_Pan69 on Fri 06/24/11 08:59 PM
I've seen it, and I get it, more than you might think. Not sure you do though...... I'm not going to have a pissing contest with you over who got the "message" of Idiocracy more. I didn't "get it" at all... I did have fun laughing at all of the stupid people though! lol! That's the whole point. It was a look at US. It may have been a look at you, DON'T LUMP ME IN WITH THE REST!!!! lol (too funny!)

Kleisto Joined Tue 05/13/08 Posts: 5704	Fri 06/24/11 08:59 PM
I've seen it, and I get it, more than you might think. Not sure you do though...... I'm not going to have a pissing contest with you over who got the "message" of Idiocracy more. I didn't "get it" at all... I did have fun laughing at all of the stupid people though! lol! That's the whole point. It was a look at US. It may have been a look at {i]you, DON'T LUMP ME IN WITH THE REST!!!! lol (too funny!) Sometimes my head hurts from the ignorance around here....it really does.

Peter_Pan69 Joined Sun 08/23/09 Posts: 2781	Fri 06/24/11 09:01 PM
I've seen it, and I get it, more than you might think. Not sure you do though...... I'm not going to have a pissing contest with you over who got the "message" of Idiocracy more. I didn't "get it" at all... I did have fun laughing at all of the stupid people though! lol! That's the whole point. It was a look at US. It may have been a look at {i]you, DON'T LUMP ME IN WITH THE REST!!!! lol (too funny!) Sometimes my head hurts from the ignorance around here....it really does. Well then you need to give up ignorance. I haven't had a headache in 26 years, you should try it...

Abracadabra Joined Thu 04/12/07 Posts: 17851	Fri 06/24/11 09:17 PM
You're going to hold that out to fellow human, and simultaneously argue that you have the correct and accurate lowdown on God? What? You are going to have to rephrase that. Can these discussions get any sillier? I didn't think it was getting silly, annoying and redundant. You seem unfamiliar with the argument style called "raising the roof". I was revealing that JeannieBean's demand for "absolute proof" of God or really of anything else. Raising the roof? Oh please. You just told Jeannie that even if you met her in person it would not be proof of her existence to you because she could be a delusion of you own mind. Yet, you have the arrogance to claim that your religious views of God have some sort of merit? If you, yourself, are prepared to confess that you are so unsure of your own experience that you could be suffering from delusions even concerning people standing right in front of you, then why should anyone believe that your religious beliefs are anything more than pure delusion? You've just confessed that you can't even trust your very own mind or senses! Yet you act like other people should? That's truly hilarious Spider. Other people could actually go there. But you CAN'T! I could tell you that I don't trust my knowledge to be anything more than delusions, because I'm not out to PROVE anything to you, nor am I out to convince you that you should believe in my views of God or anything else. Yet, it's YOUR AGENDA to convince other people that you have the correct and accurate lowdown on God. Therefore you don't have the luxury of claiming to be delusional. You're claiming too much arrogance for that. You claim to KNOW THE TRUTH OF GOD! There's no room for delusion in that Spider!

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Fri 06/24/11 09:18 PM
Pan, I asked about the tenets of Christianity regarding God's character/attributes, namely omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence. You answered that God was "unknowable". Then later claimed that we could know God's attributes without knowing God and qualified that claim with the term "absolutely" as if it makes a difference. We cannot know things about God if He is unknowable. God's attributes are God. Knowing some of them is knowing something about God. Knowing something about God is knowing God in some small way or another. It is your claim that He is unknowable. So, I ask again... How can we know anything about the attributes of God without by virtue of that and that alone knowing something about God?

Peter_Pan69 Joined Sun 08/23/09 Posts: 2781	Fri 06/24/11 09:29 PM
Pan, I asked about the tenets of Christianity regarding God's character/attributes, namely omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence. You answered that God was "unknowable". Then later claimed that we could know God's attributes without knowing God and qualified that claim with the term "absolutely" as if it makes a difference. We cannot know things about God if He is unknowable. God's attributes are God. Knowing some of them is knowing something about God. Knowing something about God is knowing God in some small way or another. It is your claim that He is unknowable. So, I ask again... How can we know anything about the attributes of God without by virtue of that and that alone knowing something about God? See that? You're doing it again... I don't consider "knowing about" something to be the same as "knowing" something. Seriously, I don't "get" your logic. I do "get" why you employ said logic though... Just let it go...

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Fri 06/24/11 09:47 PM
See that? You're doing it again... I don't consider "knowing about" something to be the same as "knowing" something. Can we know something about X and X be unknowable?

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Fri 06/24/11 10:00 PM Edited by creativesoul on Fri 06/24/11 10:01 PM
Try this... 1. God is unknowable.(your premiss) 2. We cannot know anything about that which is unknowable.(law of noncontradiction) 3. We cannot know anything about God(from 1,2) 4. God's attributes constitute God's character 5. We cannot know God's attributes(from 2,3,4) Now, which part are you objecting to Pan?

Peter_Pan69 Joined Sun 08/23/09 Posts: 2781	Fri 06/24/11 10:01 PM
Try this... 1. God is unknowable.(your premiss) 2. We cannot know anything about that which is unknowable.(law of noncontradiction) 3. We cannot know anything about God(from 1,2) 4. God's attributes constitute God's character 5. We cannot know God's attributes(from 3,4) Now, which part are you objecting to Pan? Try this: Let it go....

Spidercmb Joined Fri 04/27/07 Posts: 13137	Fri 06/24/11 10:02 PM
creative: If you do not know that it is an accurate picture, then you 'walk by faith' alone that the picture is true, yes? spider: No, not at all. That's quite the logical leap. There is a good deal of evidence and logic for the existence of the God of the Bible Hence the question mark... Let's look at the logic. What grounds your belief. Perhaps it be better put, how do you justify your belief that the picture of the God of the Bible is accurate? William Lane Craig can explain it better than I. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2KzHMKFeNY

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Fri 06/24/11 10:06 PM
It would be a very odd way to talk if we were to say I know that the tree is green, but the tree is unknowable. It is just as odd to say that God is unknowable, yet I know He is good and just.

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Fri 06/24/11 10:13 PM
creative: Try this... 1. God is unknowable.(your premiss) 2. We cannot know anything about that which is unknowable.(law of noncontradiction) 3. We cannot know anything about God(from 1,2) 4. God's attributes constitute God's character 5. We cannot know God's attributes(from 3,4) Now, which part are you objecting to Pan? Pan: Try this: Let it go.... It is never a good sign when one refuses to answer simple questions about their own claims. Alright Pan, evidently you do not wish to answer. Not very convincing. Your claims are incoherent.

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Fri 06/24/11 10:30 PM
Spider, That video offered justification for the existence of a personal creator God, not for holding that the biblical God was an accurate picture thereof.

Spidercmb Joined Fri 04/27/07 Posts: 13137	Fri 06/24/11 10:35 PM
Spider, That video offered justification for the existence of a personal creator God, not for holding that the biblical God was an accurate picture thereof. I'll follow up on that tomorrow, I'm about to hit the sack.

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Fri 06/24/11 10:38 PM
Nite spider.

jrbogie Joined Sat 03/01/08 Posts: 2490	Sat 06/25/11 04:52 AM
great then we reject each other's definition. btw, here you don't tell me how things work. Don't worry, when I do I'll use small words. in what kind of debate do you find such a tactic effective? do you derive your moral and ethical values that allow you to use such personal attacks in a simple forum from your religion??? You are accusing BILLIONS of people of being delusional, but you get diaper rash when somebody says "I'll use small words"? Some ego you have and thin skin to match. i accused nobody. i simply stated a definition. skin's pretty thick actually. personal innuendo from religious faithfull is hardly new to me on the forums.

jrbogie Joined Sat 03/01/08 Posts: 2490	Sat 06/25/11 05:01 AM Edited by jrbogie on Sat 06/25/11 05:08 AM


jrbogie Joined Sat 03/01/08 Posts: 2490	Sat 06/25/11 05:06 AM Edited by jrbogie on Sat 06/25/11 05:08 AM
It would be a very odd way to talk if we were to say I know that the tree is green, but the tree is unknowable. It is just as odd to say that God is unknowable, yet I know He is good and just. i think i see where you're having difficulty with what is and is not unknowable. everything other than what we experience ourselves is unknowable. if you see the tree you are experiencing a vision of the tree and you see that it is green. you know the tree is green becaus you saw it. what you do not know and never know is how trees came to be. but you haven't experienced god much less seen him being good and just, at least you'd be hard pressed to convince me of such an experience, so you do not know that god is good and just. you believe it to be, i'm sure, but you can never know.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sat 06/25/11 08:25 AM
See that? You're doing it again... I don't consider "knowing about" something to be the same as "knowing" something. Can we know something about X and X be unknowable? um I know about Britney Spears, but I dont KNOW Britney Spears I know about Columbus, but I dont KNOW Columbus I think you can read and hear information about a person but still not KNOW the person

jrbogie Joined Sat 03/01/08 Posts: 2490	Sat 06/25/11 09:54 AM
See that? You're doing it again... I don't consider "knowing about" something to be the same as "knowing" something. Can we know something about X and X be unknowable? um I know about Britney Spears, but I dont KNOW Britney Spears I know about Columbus, but I dont KNOW Columbus I think you can read and hear information about a person but still not KNOW the person ah, but what do you really KNOW about britney and chris? i'm sure you've had the experience to read about them or seen movies and shows about them so obviously you know what you've seen, read and heard. but that's all you really know is it not? i KNEW for certain that columbus discovered america in my early school years because if i KNEW anything different i would not have got that "a" in history. learned later that no, leif erickson and others where here before. so what do you actually know about chris and britney to be absolutely certain?