Via: Bob Nelson • 131 comments • an hour ago
... apparently, there are many who actually do believe that God hates the wicked and despises sinners.
Who? You ask. Well, people like pastor, author and Bible teacher R.C. Sproul, for example.
Try to watch this clip below without throwing up. [It wasn’t easy for me].
So, just to summarize:
*There’s nothing more dangerous than preaching that God loves people...
Apr 19 5:email@example.comI have yet to find a YEC who can defend their foundational beliefs except to ultimately resort to: 'well, it is in the Bible'.
Apr 18 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Apparently, but I do not see why this is so difficult to understand. Even when I describe this in pure secular terms: 'If the future is knowable then free will is not possible' it still...
Apr 18 2:email@example.com"..."
No that is not what I have stated. I have repeatedly noted that if a future choice is knowable then reality is predetermined. Knowing the choice does not drive the choice nor does it...
Apr 18 1:firstname.lastname@example.org( c o n t i n u e d )
Interesting. You have posited that an omniscient entity might have a plan with undecided factors that would be decided once creations make choices. But you...
Apr 18 1:email@example.com"..."
No, mere declaration would not work. Rather than merely declare, I have explained why free will cannot exist with omniscience. Here is the reasoning yet again in yet another form:
Apr 17 12:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
The ability to freely choose to obey and/or worship was not provided. So no glory. Your question ignores the big O's. With the big O's, Adam & Eve could not freely choose because...
Apr 17 12:email@example.com"..."
State the challenge to which you object rather than make a vague reference.
No, I stated that God killing the entire planet (human beings, animals, plants) spare a few is not an...
Apr 17 2:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Here is your chance to explain the 'glory' in setting Adam and Eve up to fail.
Explain. Are you saying you believe God forgave Abraham (and possibly all his progeny) of their...
Apr 17 1:email@example.com"..."
What do you expect to accomplish by starting your comment with such an offensive accusation?
Which challenge, specifically, are you referring to?
Your 'total crap'...
Apr 16 4:firstname.lastname@example.orgNone are as bad as the Young Earth Creationists who believe the entire Bible is divine and inerrant.
Apr 16 1:email@example.com"..."
It has been done successfully for thousands of years and continues to the present. People are capable of believing what they wish to be true. ( And of course fear, indoctrination, etc....
Apr 15 11:firstname.lastname@example.orgOne must already believe what is being preached for it to be proselytizing?
Apr 15 11:email@example.com"..."
Not sure why you ask. The believer can express whatever the believer thinks is true. And, for some, preaching is whatever the preacher thinks will serve his or her needs (see:...
Apr 15 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgProselytizing does not recognize the burden of proof given it typically declares objective truth based solely on faith.
Apr 15 10:email@example.com"..."
Expressing a belief bears no burden of proof. Claiming objective truth of the belief, however, bears the burden.
Apr 15 8:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
I am not insisting. You asked why so I gave you my answer.
Apr 15 5:email@example.com"..."
Courtesy? Asking the author to qualify her meaning rather than presume an unlikely interpretation.
Apr 15 5:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
A mere reference to Christians in general is not a sweeping generalization. For example, attacks on Jesus is offensive to Christians is not a sweeping generalization.
Now, on your...
Apr 15 4:email@example.com"..."
Good choice. And here you can always ask epistte what she meant and remove all guesswork.
Apr 15 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
'They' are not of a single mind nor do 'they' hold identical interpretations. Note that even quite religiously enlightened individuals here on NT will argue that the God of the OT...
Apr 15 1:email@example.comDo you think that is what epistte meant by 'true knowledge'? Is this ↴ what you think epistte really is saying?:
You can have faith and belief without evidence but knowledge...
Apr 15 1:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
True. But sometimes they are.
Apr 15 1:email@example.com"..."
Would it be so hard to recognize that I was not making a universal quantification? Is it really that hard to not intentionally draw an unlikely and illogical interpretation?
Apr 15 1:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Careful does not mean to the point of writing legal language.
We all expect that our fellow posters will use context and common sense when reading because, point of fact, we are not...
Apr 15 12:email@example.comUltimately the evidence shows the Bible was written by many ancient men over thousands of years and what we currently call 'the Bible' are just 'value-added' copies in a long series of copies....
Apr 15 11:firstname.lastname@example.orgEpistte's phrase 'true knowledge' as used connotes 'known truth'.
A claim of known truth bears the burden of proof.
Apr 15 1:email@example.com"..."
Do you normally assume an illogical and unlikely interpretation?
Given you understand the difference between formal and informal language you realize that in formal language qualifiers...
Apr 14 11:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
I did not write all Christians; so why not just make the normal assumption and treat 'Christians' as 'Christians in general'?
Why do you engage in this crap, Bob? You purposely...
Apr 14 11:email@example.com"..."
Okay then you see the inconsistency.
Correct. And, point of fact, there are inconsistencies. Some Christians (many?) claim that Jesus and the God of the OT (or gods) are...
Apr 14 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
The comparison does not require God pass a test - it challenges human beings to explain the differences. Note what I wrote: " it constantly puts Christians on the defensive trying to...
Apr 14 8:email@example.com"..."
You are talking about consistency among translations. The errancy of the Bible refers more to errors in facts and logic rather than transcription errors. For example, an omniscient God...
Apr 14 8:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Easy. Contrast the behavior of Yahweh with that of Jesus. I explained this in my post. You reply with 'no' yet provide no explanation as why. Certainly you see the differences in...
Apr 14 7:email@example.comCitation?
Show where Jesus declares himself to be the Father hypostasis (Yahweh).
Apr 14 6:17pm@5The OT is certainly inconvenient; it constantly puts Christians on the defensive trying to explain away the acts of Yahweh given the message (and acts) of Jesus. One can easily argue that God...
Michelle Bachmann : We Will Never See A More Godly President Than Donald Trump
Via: JohnRussell • 22 comments • 2 days ago
Michele Bachmann Says Trump is ‘Most Biblical President’ of ‘Our Lifetime’
CALEB ECARMA APRIL 15, 2019
Former Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann recently described President Donald Trump as the most biblical president in a lifetime.
“I will say to your listeners, in my lifetime I have never seen a more biblical...
Apr 16 8:firstname.lastname@example.orgDoes not seem to be the brightest bulb either.
Apr 16 7:01pm@8Trump might be the most biblical PotUS depending on what Bachmann means by 'biblical'. Trump certainly has known plenty of women in a biblical sense. So he has that.
But if Bachmann is...
A Life Nuanced
By: Perrie Halpern R.A. • 327 comments • 2 days ago
I realize that I am not the easiest person to understand. It might look to some that my positions are all over the map, and they are. Even within a position, I might sit down in a spot that is somewhat surprising, even to those who thought they knew me. I live in that dangerous place in the twilight zone known as independent. The unicorn of rational thought. It has taken a big part of my life...
Apr 16 6:email@example.comYou disagreed with my posit that the majority of voters seem to be partisan. Per Pew, the partisans (non independents) are still the majority.
43% vs. 57%
My point never was that independents...
Apr 16 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Independents vote based on the circumstances as opposed to simply voting based on party. But as I noted in my comment, one of the considerations at times will be the balance of power....
Apr 16 4:email@example.com"..."
31% + 26% is 57%. I checked with Pew before writing my post.
Apr 14 2:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Who says one side is 'good' and the other 'evil'?
Apr 14 12:36pm@20Political parties are what enable career politicians and various forms of corruption (including the consolidation of power by party leadership). Unfortunately there is no getting rid of parties...
Religious "Nones" are now the Largest Religious Group in the Country.
Via: Thrawn 31 • 66 comments • 4 days ago
For the first time "No Religion" has topped a survey of Americans' religious identity, according to a new analysis by a political scientist. The non-religious edged out Catholics and evangelicals in the long-running General Social Survey.
Ryan Burge, a political scientist at Eastern Illinois University and a Baptist pastor, found that 23.1% of Americans now claim no religion.
Apr 15 11:email@example.com"..."
I agree. We have no way of knowing that a particular mind did not experience something that produced a particular communicated interpretation. Even if someone makes a claim such as...
Apr 15 12:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Only if true. Until it is established as truth (proof or at least convincing evidence) it is far more sensible to hold that they do not KNOW either. How convinced one is of a fact does...
Apr 14 11:email@example.comI suspect most of the nones are agnostics: agnostic theists (believe in some higher power but realize they do not know) and agnostic atheists (not convinced that a higher power exists but realize...
Apr 14 2:51pm@5If religious 'nones' means irreligious based on the observation that we do not know if there is a creator entity; much less a divine plan then I would say this is progress. It is always best,...
Hell is a slander against God, and against the victims of evil
Via: Bob Nelson • 29 comments • 6 days ago
The money-changers had it coming because, Jesus said, they had turned a house of prayer into a den of thieves. They were profiting from others’ poverty and ripping off the poor — just the sort of thing that we would expect Jesus would find infuriating. He was angry on behalf of the poor victims, and thus he was angry at the money-changers.
Christians have always wrestled with and...
Apr 12 11:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Given this seed discusses Christians and Jesus, the context defines the god(s) in question (Yahweh and Jesus).
Yes. Jesus and Yahweh (the Son and the Father).
Apr 12 10:email@example.com"..."
But that is not true. The Bible is the definitive reference for describing the God of the Bible. Just as the Harry Potter series is the definitive reference for describing Lord Voldemort.
Apr 12 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
It is sensible to assume that an irreligious person is not persuaded that the Bible is truth but rather words of ancient men pretending to speak for the grandest possible entity they could...
SPACEX FALCON HEAVY Launch Plus Booster Landings
Via: Dignitatem Societatis • 4 comments • one week ago
After two days of weather delays, Falcon Heavy's first commercial launch went off without a hitch. All three boosters landed successfully.
SpaceX doesn't seem to have a short edit of only the launch and landings up yet, so I'm posting this one from a different source. It's just as awesome, though.
Apr 11 10:38pm@3Amazing what we (human beings) can accomplish. Such a well orchestrated process that now ends with the safe (gentle controlled landing) of all three boosters.
Scientific Proof of God?
Via: TᵢG • 48 comments • one week ago
Alex is a very accomplished video blogger (especially at his age). I like his style; it is entertaining and cuts to the chase. His knowledge and articulate, biting rebuttals hint as to why he now has over 200,000 subscribers.
This analysis (one of many) deals with some of the most common arguments for those who try to prove God exists.
Apr 11 9:email@example.com"..."
Did you read this from Dig a while back?:
Apr 11 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
We are not the creator but rather the selector. Basically this is artificial selection rather than natural selection and we are the 'artificial' selector.
Apr 11 2:email@example.com"..."
Why should that hypothesis be considered in this discussion?
The process of meiosis is where the mutations occur. And what is this 'replaces the need for' stuff? That presumes...
Apr 11 2:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
No it does not! Science assumes (predicts even) the opposite. But ultimately, the scientific position on the nature of existence prior to the Big Bang is that this remains to be...
Apr 11 1:email@example.comFollowing the analogy (which has now been carried too far) I would consider a mutation to be a sector that has mangled bits during copy. The information is not missing, per se, it is corrupted....
Apr 11 1:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
It is profoundly different. The two major differences:
The universe is far less complex than a sentient entity that would create it. The form of the universe (cosmological evolution)...
Apr 09 11:email@example.com"..."
They are examples of variation based on environmental conditions.
Yes. That was the point of the link.
More likely?? You offer an entirely different example of...
Apr 09 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
I think you need to state the point you are trying to make. If this is somehow your attempt to show that Darwin was wrong then I would call this a non sequitur argument. Thus you must...
Apr 09 6:email@example.comDNA is very stable. It takes very few critical changes, at times, to effect substantial differences in species. We are 96% in common (DNA wise) with chimpanzees.
Apr 09 6:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Apr 09 6:email@example.com"..."
Not only is this possible (gradually altering the environment), it has been done countless times.
Apr 09 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Correct, you need to include mutation (random errors) during genetic copying.
Substantiate this claim.
Not sure where to even start given you do not seem to...
Apr 09 4:email@example.com"..."
I have no idea what you refer to as the elephant in the room. Clarity?
Correct. Are you suggesting Alex thinks science proves? Again, I do not know where this is coming...
Apr 09 1:firstname.lastname@example.orgHe has made quite a few videos on various topics. It is good to see a young person so effectively countering the nonsense of his elders.
Apr 09 12:50am@1This video provides both sides of the argument. The argument is posed from a religious perspective and rebutted from a skeptic's perspective.
The New Gods Are Arriving
By: CB • 58 comments • 4 days ago
Apr 11 6:email@example.comThis point, however, is certainly a profound question that applies to all Christians.
Ultimately the Christian answer is 'atonement' - God forgave all sins and brought peace between God...
Wheaton scholars pen first 'Origins' college textbook bridging the Bible to ‘mainline science’
Via: Keep America Great! • 104 comments • one week ago
BALTIMORE — Wheaton College professors have penned what is believed to be the first college-level textbook outlining mainstream scientific theories on origins of life and how they fit within a biblical framework, something they say has been lacking in Christian higher education for decades.
Based on over two decades of teaching origins at the historic Illinois evangelical higher education...
Apr 09 12:firstname.lastname@example.orgYes, discovering how cells first formed would be a major breakthrough.
The answer (if we are able to find it) will come from science, not from an ancient, static, demonstrably errant book.
Apr 08 11:email@example.comPathetic (IMO)
Apr 08 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgA proud declaration of belief based on nothing. Holding up unsubstantiated belief (faith) as something good rather than a failure of reason.
Apr 06 4:email@example.com"..."
And, as I noted, you are contradicting both science and the book you have seeded.
Apr 05 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Back up your claim with evidence.
It is bad enough to categorically dismiss uncomfortable science such as evolution, but apparently you also ignore the work of biblical scholars who...
Apr 05 10:email@example.com"..."
That means evolutionary sciences are properly explained without the utter nonsense imposed by YECs trying to change the laws of physics to fit their boneheaded notion that the Earth is <...
Apr 05 6:20pm@8Given this textbook is written from the Old Earth Creationist perspective and operates with a grant (and presumably the endorsement of BioLogos) it will certainly clash with Young Earth Creationist...
Teaching Religious Views as Science
By: TᵢG • 143 comments • one week ago
Answers In Genesis is probably the most influential Young Earth Creationism organization. It is an organization with about $172 million in assets which aggressively promotes religious indoctrination of children into a literal interpretation of the Bible, most notably that the Earth is ~6,000 years old.
The organization holds that anything in science, philosophy, history, etc. that...
Apr 09 11:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
That is my conclusion too. I see no way that YEC leaders such as those in AiG could produce their 'rebuttals' to science without having a rather good understanding of the actual science....
Apr 09 11:email@example.com"..."
I have found YECs (the individuals I have encountered online) to be impossibly stubborn. They KNOW they are right and nothing will change that. I suppose if one can take a position that...
Apr 09 12:firstname.lastname@example.org... and to engage those who actually believe this nonsense.
Apr 08 11:email@example.com"..."
Same here, but there is no denying their existence or their success.
This is the largest Young Earth Creationist organization in the USA (possibly the world). They are funded by...
Apr 08 11:firstname.lastname@example.orgAnd to again illustrate the despicable nonsense of those who wish to dumb down the next generation, here is how Answers In Genesis discusses the various supercontinents. Note that most all of the...
Apr 08 10:email@example.comI would say there are a great many misconceptions on a great many things. But for a misconception to be corrected the misconceiver must at least consider information that is contrary to held...
Apr 08 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgThat is what the Old Earth Creationists hold. YECs actually consider creation taking place in 6 24 hour days.
A brilliant Old Earth Creationist is Dr. Hugh Ross of 'Reasons to Believe'. If you...
Apr 08 4:email@example.comYou were missed!
Apr 08 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
I am not arguing to delay vocational interests. You missed the point.
I agree. Part of my point.
Hardly. K-12 science is fundamental stuff....
Apr 08 4:email@example.com"..."
Auto mechanics do indeed use arithmetic and do so often. But fractions and unit conversion is as far as their mathematics needs to go.
Physicians, in practice, also use mostly...
Apr 08 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Agreed. My point was regarding expecting a child to know what vocation s/he might pursue. Aptitude testing in high school in preparation for advanced education is currently done and...
Apr 08 3:email@example.com"..."
Most skeptics I know do seem to know the Bible better than most theists.
How would you approach something like this?:
This notion that evolution is pseudoscience is predicated...
Apr 08 3:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Non sequitur. My point was that prior to sophomore year in college most kids do not know what they want to do. The younger the child the less likely that they will be prepared to zero...
Apr 08 2:email@example.com"..."
True. Why did you make this obvious statement? I made no such claim.
Are you arguing just for the sake of argument? What a petty nit-picky point is this?
Apr 08 1:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
When do you think a child figures out their vocation? Often times that is not really clear until the sophomore year in college. How can a child determine that which is of interest unless...
Apr 08 12:email@example.com"..."
The purpose of teaching science is to explain contemporary understanding of how reality works and to cultivate critical thinking skills.
Science classes in schools do not dwell on...
Apr 08 11:firstname.lastname@example.orgI did not include it because my focus here is not on one or even a few schools but rather the more general question of weaving religious beliefs into subjects such as science. As noted in my...
Apr 08 10:email@example.com"..."
You fail to deliver stats on those private and home-schooled students who are taught nonsense. This article does not deem private or home-schooling to be inferior but rather notes how...
Apr 08 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgJohn followed my fact check link: This quiz was fact checked and found to be authentic.
Apr 08 1:email@example.com"..."
Totally agree. My son was allowed into a special curriculum for 'gifted' kids which actively taught critical thinking skills. I thought that was outstanding and wondered why it was not...
Apr 08 1:firstname.lastname@example.orgAnd those who seek to indoctrinate the next generation religious with views that contradict well-established science, history, logic, etc. should be challenged by people in every forum (such as...
Apr 08 12:58am@1There are about 30 million YECs in the USA - people who actually believe the Earth is ~6,000 years old and the implications that come with that. If they had their way, what would our science...
Yes, Conservative Christians Are 'Triggered' By LGBT Pride Flags. Here's Why
Via: Keep America Great! • 51 comments • one week ago
In late March, House Democrats temporarily replaced the POW-MIA flags hanging outside their offices with pink flags celebrating transgender identity. Family Research Council (FRC) President Tony Perkins called the flags an " unpleasant reminder ." In early March, a high school girl responded to LGBT pride flags by posting Bible verses. Last year, a Chicago priest burned an LGBT pride flag...
Apr 09 1:email@example.comSo will KAG explain to us how he managed to choose to be homosexual for this experiment?
Apr 09 1:firstname.lastname@example.orgCan you choose to be homosexual? If sexual orientation is a choice, the please demonstrate how this choice is accomplished.
Just choose to be gay for 30 minutes. Tell us how you accomplished...
The Looney Bin 3
By: JohnRussell • 137 comments • 5 days ago
People who vote for Donald Trump in 2020 need to be embarrassed of themselves for the rest of their lives.
Apr 08 2:email@example.com"..."
Correct. I stated that I do not keep records to inform you that if I had mentioned socialism to you in the past that I likely would not know how many times I had done so. (But per my...
Apr 08 12:firstname.lastname@example.orgI do not keep records, rather just sporadically opine when people complain about something that could not happen in the USA in our lifetimes and miss what is actually happening right now....
Apr 08 11:email@example.comStatism (in particular social democracy), not socialism. To promote socialism one would have to actively seek to change the economic system of the nation. Bernie Sanders, et. al. use the term...
Evolutionary changes played a crucial role in industrialization, study finds
Via: Dignitatem Societatis • 10 comments • 2 weeks ago
A recent study of centuries-old French-Canadian genealogical data by a Brown University economist revealed evidence that supports his own 17-year-old theory that natural selection played a pivotal role in the emergence of economic growth and industrialization.
Oded Galor, a professor of economics at Brown, and Marc Klemp, a visiting scholar in Brown's Population Studies and Training...
Apr 07 11:11pm@3I can see this happening.
Farm families tended to be larger because new kids meant more resources to man the farm. As we industrialized and people moved from family farms to work in urban...
The Darwin Day Lecture 2019, with Richard Dawkins
Via: Dignitatem Societatis • 559 comments • 2 weeks ago
Richard Dawkins awarded inaugural Humanists UK Darwin Day medal
To celebrate Darwin Day on 12 February 2019, Humanists UK hosted its largest annual Darwin Day Lecture to date, given by evolutionary biologist Professor Richard Dawkins and chaired by evolutionary anthropologist Professor Alice Roberts, the President of Humanists UK.
Close to 2,000 people turned...
Apr 07 11:02pm@9( carrying over from Nerm @7.2.286 so that the thread can be closed for performance reasons )
I am the last person to try to explain how anyone can take the Bible as divine (OT or NT)....
Apr 07 8:firstname.lastname@example.orgTo me, if one is to use the label 'God' I expect sentience to be an attribute. Without sentience we are just talking about undirected dynamics - what I call quintessential existence.
Apr 07 5:email@example.comI agree that if you wish to define 'God' as that which enables life then that is fine. You should not, however, just use the term 'God' without making it clear to your readers that you have that...
Apr 07 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
These three excerpts offer, respectively:
God, possibly, is not defined. But there is a God.
God's does not exist because faith...
Apr 07 1:email@example.comOn what grounds do you conclude a god (undefined by you) exists in any form other than imagination?
Define what you mean by ‘God’ and deliver evidence of same or admit that your claim is mere...
Apr 07 12:firstname.lastname@example.orgThis is the silliness that goes nowhere. Basically you deem anything that is even merely imagined as existing. Imagining a sentient creator is not the same as a sentient entity that has acted...
Apr 05 12:email@example.com"..."
You need to stop creating allegations out of thin air. Never have I even suggested that I understand you (or anyone else) better than you understand yourself. This is the kind of...
Apr 04 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgHow do you define 'spirit'? If 'spirit' is simply a feeling then I would say there is good evidence that it changes lives. For example, a person in despair who has 'found Jesus' (so to speak)...
Apr 04 5:email@example.comThen I have no interest in this discussion. If every word -even the word existence- is up for debate, then the entire exchange is meaningless.
Apr 04 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
You conclude there is a God and express it as a claim:
Apr 04 3:email@example.comIs that supposed to be coherent?
Apr 04 3:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
I would add that believing in something is personal and is certainly everyone's right. But when they claim truth, they should expect to be challenged.
Importantly, when the beliefs turn...
Apr 04 3:email@example.com"..."
I have provided this countless times. My definition for God is the sentient creator for that which exists (at least the known universe). Period. No other attributes.
But it is far...
Apr 04 3:firstname.lastname@example.orgExactly, it is simply a juvenile game. Yet another tactic to pretend as though there is a thoughtful discussion / debate in process.
Apr 04 1:email@example.comPlay your juvenile games with someone else. If you have a serious question ask it, but you are wasting your time if you think I am going to answer stupid questions. Try to make the question...
Apr 04 1:firstname.lastname@example.orgSo you can appreciate my point that the fear of death (and the assuaging of that fear by religious promises) is a significant part of the reason why people continue to hold to religious beliefs —...
Apr 04 1:email@example.com"..."
Most atheists simply state that they are not convinced a god exists. Only a small minority of atheists (the gnostic atheists) make the irrational claim that no god exists.
Apr 04 1:firstname.lastname@example.orgIf you do not want people to note deflection then I suggest you not reply unless you intend to respond to the content of the comment.
Apr 04 11:email@example.com"..."
I have to be in your faith to understand existence and death? Why write such nonsense?
No, I do not. Again you illustrate your (I think deliberate) complete lack of...
Apr 04 11:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
And now instead of spending all of your time explaining how tired you were you could, fully rested, address DS's comments. Instead your entire post avoids a direct, honest response.
Apr 04 11:email@example.com"..."
(As an aside: a suggestion) Do not hit 'Post Your Comment' until you are done with it. The system grants 10 minutes to edit a response in case you see a mistake after publishing....
Apr 04 11:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Sure it could.
The Abrahamic religions (et. al.) assuage the fear of death. Yes we all die but that is just the beginning of true life. We have an even better reality awaiting us where...
Apr 03 11:email@example.com"..."
Is dishonesty justified by 'whatever is necessary'?
No emotional component, eh?
Faith is more than emotion. Another major component is indoctrination. Another is...
Apr 03 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
You wrote this earlier:
You are saying that evolution yields God at the end. Now you ask how this result could be the first cause of the process.
Given you have been extremely...
Apr 03 9:email@example.comMy style is to use logic, facts and attempt to use the dialectic to tease out truth. Ridicule might be appropriate for things like flat Earth beliefs, YEC beliefs, etc. These are beliefs that...
Apr 03 5:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
There must be a claimed god before there can be theism.
Technically. If there were no theism then everyone would be an atheist.
Where 'God' would be an abstract...
Apr 03 5:email@example.com"..."
I reject that premise. This is something that needs to be established.
We do not know that there was a beginning or that it was a void (whatever that is supposed to mean)....
Apr 03 5:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Your comments do not -to me- evidence an understanding of what Dawkins professes. Merely reading and observing does not necessarily translate into understanding what the man is offering....
Apr 03 4:email@example.comI know from your past comments that your experiences with Christians has been terrible. The Christians in your life certainly are not living up to the ideals of their self-identified belief...
Apr 03 3:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Apr 03 11:email@example.comTry using a larger font. Maybe that will work.
Odd that you expect people to answer your questions (especially stupid questions) given you refuse to answer direct and applicable questions.
Apr 03 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Here you admit to asking a pointless question ("we all should know the answer") as a deflection. You brought me into the equation asking a pointless question when Raven directly...
Apr 03 10:email@example.com"..."
Exactly. CB is playing yet another game of deflection. You spoke directly to him and he brings me in to try to deflect rather than stand up and deal with your comment.
Apr 03 12:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
If only a Christian were around who would honestly attempt to directly answer such questions ...
Apr 02 10:email@example.comI phrased my comment as a question so as to be instructive. I was not asking for answers, but rather pointing you back at Raven's comment.
Apr 02 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgAgain you miss the point of even the clearest post.
Do you demand that your God (the God of the Bible) exists, that you have a spiritual connection with Him and find that those who do not hold...
Apr 02 7:email@example.comPersonally I am quite convinced that nobody can put forth quality evidence for the existence of a god (especially the Abrahamic god).
What I would like, however, is for someone to put forth...
Apr 02 7:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Complain, complain, complain. DP was not trying to call impasse. You need to read more carefully.
You came onto this (Dig's) seed by your choice. You chose to make claims,...
Apr 02 6:email@example.comAnd stop being so damned boring DP!
Apr 02 2:firstname.lastname@example.orgThree posts and not a single rebuttal or even direct response to my points. Just responses that go off in entirely different directions (and, of course, make it personal) as if to illustrate the...
Apr 02 11:email@example.com"..."
Mere claims of a spiritual relationship with God coupled with often vague, deflective, non sequitur, faux obtuse responses and a predictable refusal to answer direct questions is the...
Apr 01 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Apr 01 10:email@example.comI am asking Cal if this is what he meant. This is something only he can answer.
Apr 01 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
What in that post was new information to you?
Apr 01 10:email@example.comSkeptic (per Oxford):
Why do you offer this?
Does it not make sense that skeptics doubt the truth of religions?
Some find that to be a very rational approach. Do not believe something...
Apr 01 9:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Skeptics are unrefined religious people?
Apr 01 8:email@example.comDP made some excellent, insightful points. You refuse to even consider what he said and offer a pointed rebuttal. Why engage atheists -especially as aggressively as you try- if you do not want...
Apr 01 8:firstname.lastname@example.orgIt is common knowledge that believers consider their feelings (the Spirit) to be evidence.
Claiming what you 'feel' is evidence does not make it so and certainly is not going to persuade...
Apr 01 7:email@example.com"..."
See this is where you go awry. You presume that atheists abruptly stop seeking truth simply because we are not persuaded by mere claims of other human beings. To me this is like a flat...
Apr 01 7:firstname.lastname@example.orgNo I do not think so. God is stated as a definitive answer. The infinite regress ends at God (in your view) and God has a meaning to you (sentient creator, etc.). That is not the same as 'I...
Apr 01 6:email@example.comYou wrote:
That suggests that when believers hit the 'God-point' in the regress they stop and make no attempt to even think about the remaining issues. That is equivalent to the cliche...
Apr 01 4:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Define what you mean by 'God'. Without that, anything you ask or claim in this subject matter has no meaning.
Apr 01 4:email@example.comEggs were around well before the ‘first’ transitional chicken-like life form hatched from one.
Apr 01 2:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Your post is a bit too non-committal for me to find much interest.
Bottom line, if you do not know what you mean by 'God' and thus are unwilling to define your meaning then do not make...
Apr 01 12:email@example.com"..."
That is nonsense. Dawkins is an atheist because he is not convinced there is a god (a sentient creator).
Why? Define 'God'.
Apr 01 12:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Define ‘God’ as you use the word. Seems to me that you equate it to first cause with no requirement for sentience (and thus no intent).
Apr 01 11:email@example.com"..."
Not sure how you get that from what Dig wrote.
Sure, except that the emergence of something as complex as a god does not compare well with the emergence of life forms as we know...
Apr 01 12:firstname.lastname@example.orgCertainly.
By the same reasoning, why not regenerate teeth? The loss of teeth (and the decay prior to loss) was a major contributor to early death. And why do men have nipples?
'So much evil, Mommy, those poor babies'
Via: Keep America Great! • 173 comments • one week ago
The deeply moving pro-life movie Unplanned opened in theaters this weekend to great box office success – but that only tells you so much. It's the testimonies of the viewers which are so powerful.
Have you seen the movie 'Unplanned' yet?
To the surprise (and consternation) of Hollywood, Unplanned opened to more than $6 million in box office receipts, finishing #5 in the nation....
Apr 06 3:email@example.comWho created Satan?
Who has more power than Satan?
Who allows Satan to continue?
Apr 06 11:firstname.lastname@example.orgAmazing you still come back with your cliche platitude.
Even when the comment clearly and deliberately notes that this is analysis of a character according to the book that defines the character...
Apr 06 10:email@example.comBy 'God', katrix is referring to the God character of the Bible (specifically Yahweh - the God of the OT). She was clear in her qualification: "According to your bible, ..."
To see what a...
Apr 05 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgNot really much of a rebuttal. Explain why Gordy is wrong.
Apr 03 10:email@example.comWhy do people use the truly horrible tactic of faux obtuseness? Why do they think it accomplishes anything other than make them look bad?
Apr 03 12:firstname.lastname@example.orgSimilarly you trust the Bible as a source of information about the characters it defines. If the Bible claims that its God character killed almost all life with a global flood then that, by...
Apr 02 11:email@example.com"..."
Then do not pretend to not understand; that just encourages people to offer an explanation.
Even if they are right? Clearly the God of the Bible is a mass killer. You know...
Apr 02 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgOf course not. My question was answering your concern. Clearly you understand that we all can declare that Darth Vader was a mass-murderer. But we all know that Darth Vader does not exist.
Apr 02 10:email@example.com"..."
Do you really not understand how one can analyze a character of fiction?
Was Darth Vader a mass murderer?
Apr 02 10:firstname.lastname@example.orgWould you accept evidence that the God of the Bible is a mass killer?
How the Left Keeps Me Religious
Via: Keep America Great! • 81 comments • 2 weeks ago
Nothing keeps me religious more than the left, not even religion itself.
I am not even particularly "spiritual." My religiosity is overwhelmingly rational (the title of my Bible commentary is "The Rational Bible"). I believe in God because creation rationally suggests a Creator.
The force that has most propelled me to religion is the great (secular) religion of the last hundred years:...
Apr 06 2:email@example.com"..."
Then you did not understand what I wrote since your rebuttal was about divine intervention — that which I did NOT argue.
A tacit admission that you do not understand what I wrote....
Apr 06 1:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
I do not argue that God forces people to do anything. The lack of free will is not a result of God preventing people from doing things. I have already explained this in detail. See...
Apr 06 1:email@example.com"..."
No. And we were not discussing religion either.
Apr 06 1:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
If only people would read what others write. I explained this @6.1.25. Note this part where I speak of the future being knowable:
I mentioned God only because LFOD is focused...
Apr 06 12:email@example.comWe are not discussing proof of God. Go read what we are discussing before asking for an explanation.
Apr 04 5:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Instead of showing that these are not contradictions, you simply declare 'you just do not understand'.
Logic does not require belief in a god. You define terms. You make claims....
Apr 04 3:email@example.comPeople are welcome to their beliefs, but when they state them as facts I suggest that they at least present a story that is not self-refuting. Contradictions are proof that what is presented is...
Apr 04 3:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
That is supposed to explain why God does things the hard way? For example, instead of the ark, the flood, etc. God could just wipe out the lifeforms He did not want and leave those He...
Apr 04 2:email@example.com"..."
Always a great way to start a post.
If God knows something will happen (omniscience) and God is in control (omnipotence) then when it happens, it happens because God allowed it to...
Apr 04 1:firstname.lastname@example.orgThat is why I have a hard time accepting the notion that Ken Ham, et. al. believes his own bullshit. How can one deliver so many bend-over-backward-stupid explanations without realizing the...
Apr 04 11:email@example.comThat is what I would have offered as an excuse if I were in the excuse-making business. That makes the most sense.
But, then again, why even bother with the ark in the first place? Just magic...
Apr 04 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
You know, KAG, God is omniscient and omnipotent. So God made Adam & Eve knowing full well that they would disobey and thus knowing full well that he would cast them from the garden...
Apr 04 10:email@example.comI think the YECs hold that all animals were vegetarians until they left the ark. At that point in time some 'evolved' into carnivores.
You know how it works, when one's religion backs one into a...
Roger Stone Defends Donald Trump's Attack on Barbara Bush: 'Well She’s Dead and He’s President — Who Won that One?'
Via: JohnRussell • 7 comments • 2 weeks ago
Longtime Donald Trump associate Roger Stone defended the president’s recent comments about late first lady Barbara Bush, writing in an Instagram post that “she’s dead and he’s president — who won that one?”
Stone alleged in the social media post, which featured a photograph of Bush, that she once “berated me in a drunken tirade after the campaign I managed for Ronald Reagan beat her...
Apr 06 2:00pm@3"..."
Cheap shot on a dead person.
If You Had To Play In A Golf Death Match, Who Would You Want As Your Partner, Jack Nicklaus or Donald Trump?
By: JohnRussell • 16 comments • 2 weeks ago
I've been reading an article from The New Yorker about Trump and golf. The NY'er article is based on a book by the sportswriter Rick Reilly. I am going to post the article somewhere below my thoughts on the matter.
There was a time when for a few years in a row I would golf with anywhere from 3 to 7 of my friends most Sunday mornings during the summer. We would meet at a local course...
Apr 03 11:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Your choice is Jack or the Donald.
Apr 03 10:31pm@2Not only would I want to play with Jack Nicklaus, I would much prefer Jack be our PotUS.
Christian business owners who show evidence of faith risk being shut down
Via: Keep America Great! • 111 comments • one week ago
Everett Piper, Washington Times Posted On 6:39 am April 2, 2019
If there was any remaining doubt, this past week’s news puts it to rest. Christians are now being punished in America.
From San Francisco, California to San Antonio, Texas, the church is being persecuted. Faithful Christians — those who still believe in the Bible as their rule of faith and practice — are...
Apr 03 3:email@example.com"..."
When it comes to people, pretty much every option applies. Some justify bigotry with scripture (and of course other means) and some are taught the bigotry based on religious...
Apr 03 10:firstname.lastname@example.org"..."
Why? Are you accepting Texan's juvenile twisting of my words to a new meaning? My question did not imply 'atheists do not engage in bigotry' it asked Texan to name the atheists in the...
Apr 03 2:email@example.comWhich atheists engage in bigotry? This article speaks of Christian business owners. Where are atheists named?
Apr 03 1:firstname.lastname@example.orgThe problem is bigotry. Too bad some Christians engage in bigotry because of religious beliefs.
Is There Method To "the left's" Madness ?
By: JohnRussell • 65 comments • 2 weeks ago
Back in 2016 Democrats were faced with a fork in the road. Bernie Sanders, a self avowed democratic socialist was running for the party nomination on a platform of medicare for all, free college for all, a $15 per hour national minimum wage, and other "leftist" policies. The other road was the more traveled one following Hillary Clinton. At the time, many Democrats thought the more prudent...
Apr 02 9:email@example.comYou might be right.
I can see Sanders potentially getting the nomination; especially with the attacks on Biden. Given his optics and his policies he likely would lose in the general and we get...