TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
MG Man wrote:RB I soo want to make sweet manlove to you right now
Slartibartfast wrote:Cool. First I ever heard about purgatory being a Roman Catholic invention but it seems to check out so back I will drop the side argument. Just to make sure, I know this sounds like a stupid question but, do you believe in hell? Now back to the main argument.
Remember your claim is that God is perfect which means he does no wrong. As long as I can show that he has done wrong once the it will disprove that God is not perfect.
In an attempt to "play by your rules" I decided to pick one story from in the bible. In that story I decided to limit my victims which would be seen as obviously innocent. I also choose to limit my victims to a group that I know would have existed at that point in time. Children who have not reached the age of reason, who were alive right before the great flood fit all of this criteria. So I'm saying God clearly killed these innocents through drowing.
So allow me to recap and summarise. Let me know where I got your views correct and correct those ones where I got your view wrong. I'll show you how ISIS is closer to what God is like than Jesus ever was which is why people getting out of the abusive relationship with him.
My main point was - God tortured and killed innocent people (proven using the subset above)
Your main counter argument - There are no such thing as innocent people ergo, God did no wrong and therefore my argument is invalid.
My side argument - God creates people that he knows will be tortured
You counter argument - Not necessarily true because purgatory does not exist
I'll allow this
My side argument - How can God be a perfect creator if his creations aren't perfect
You counter argument - Because he could have made us perfect but he made us with free will and we made this world imperfect.
Common related side argument - Why does God allow bad to happen to good people
Guessing your response - People are responsible for the bad that happens to good people
Habit7 wrote:Are you not even going to acknowledge your errors? I am clearing up your assumptions and you are still compounding them. If this is your "side argument" it is likely your main argument is just as riddled with holes.
Go and read up. For one, purgatory is a Roman Catholic invention, it is not in the Bible. Unless you inform yourself your assumption will continue to be wrong.
Irrational Atheism
By Crispin Sartwell
OCT 11 2014, 12:28 PM ET
Religious beliefs are remarkably various. But sometimes it can seem that there is only one way to be an atheist: asserting, on the basis of reasoned argument, that belief in God is irrational. The aging "new atheists"—Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Daniel Dennett, for example—pit reason against faith, science against superstition, and declare for reason and science.
It pictures the universe as a natural system, a system not guided by intelligent design and not traversed by spirits; a universe that can be explained by science, because it consists of material objects operating according to physical laws. In this sense, atheism embodies a whole picture of the world, offering explanations about its most general organization to the character of individual events.
Ironically, this is similar to the totalizing worldview of religion—neither can be shown to be true or false by science, or indeed by any rational technique. Whether theistic or atheistic, they are all matters of faith, stances taken up by tiny creatures in an infinitely rich environment.
I'm an atheist because I think of the universe as a natural, material system. I think of it, on the basis of my own extremely limited experience, as an infinitely replete but morally indifferent thing. It isn't bent on saving me, or damning me: It just is. I find comfort in that, as well as pain; wonder as well as loathing. That's my experience, and my atheism is a reflection of that experience. But it's not an argument; it's an interpretation.
I have taken a leap of atheist faith.
Religious people sometimes try to give proofs of the truth of their faith—Saint Thomas Aquinas famously gave five in his Summa Theologica. But for many people, belief comes before arguments, originating in family, social and institutional context, in desire and need. The arguments are post-hoc rationalizations. This can be true of atheism as well. For me, it's what I grew up with. It gets by in my social world, where professions of religious faith would be considered out of place. My non-faith is fundamentally part of how I connect with others and the world.
The idea that the atheist comes to her view of the world through rationality and argumentation, while the believer relies on arbitrary emotional commitments, is false. This accounts for the sense that atheists such as Christopher Hitchens or Dawkins are arrogant: Their line of thinking often takes the form of disqualifying others on the grounds that they are irrational. But the atheist too, is deciding to believe in conditions of irremediable uncertainty, not merely following out a proof.
Religious people have often offloaded the burden of their choices on institutions and relied on the Church's authorities and dogmas. But some atheists are equally willing to offload their beliefs on "reason" or "science" without acknowledging that they are making a bold intellectual commitment about the nature of the universe, and making it with utterly insufficient data. Religion at its best treats belief as a resolution in the face of doubt. I want an atheism that does the same, that displays epistemological courage.
Kierkegaard defined faith as "an objective uncertainty held fast in passionate inwardness.” He recommended Christianity not because it was well justified, and not in spite of the fact that it was insufficiently justified, but because it constituted a paradox: "The eternal God had appeared in time and died." That's not just difficult to explain, he said; it is entirely contradictory. By any reasonable measure it simply cannot be true. But that's why believing it called for total passion over the course of a lifetime. Christianity was the best thing to believe in part because it was the hardest thing to believe.
If a believer rejects rationality in this manner, you aren't likely to persuade him by showing him that his reasons are bad; he admits as much, or more. There's no use having an argument with a person who rejects argumentation.
William James—himself an eminent scientist—pointed out that science rests on emotional commitment. "Our belief in truth itself," wrote James, "that there is a truth, and that our minds and it are made for each other—what is it but a passionate affirmation of desire, in which our social system backs us up? We want to have a truth; we want to believe that our experiments and studies and discussions must put us in a continually better and better position towards it; and on this line we agree to fight out our thinking lives. But if a … sceptic asks us how we know all this, can our logic find a reply? No! certainly it cannot. It is just one volition against another—we willing to go in for life upon a trust or assumption which he, for his part, does not care to make."
It is possible, I think, to find a material world as inspiring as a spiritual world. Here is Henry Thoreau: "What is it to be admitted to a museum, to see a myriad of particular things, compared with being shown some star’s surface, some hard matter in its home! I stand in awe of my body, this matter to which I am bound has become so strange to me … Think of our life in nature—daily to be shown matter, to come in contact with it—rocks, trees, wind on our cheeks! the solid earth! the actual world! Contact! Contact! Who are we? where are we?" Many people, from Lucretius and Spinoza to Darwin and Muir, have expressed this sense of wonder or ravishment at material nature and their own embeddedness within it.
Genuinely bad things have happened to me in my life: One of my brothers was murdered; another committed suicide. I've experienced addiction and mental illness. And I, like you, have watched horrors unfold all over the globe. I don't—I can't—believe this to be best of all possible worlds. I think there is genuinely unredeemed, pointless pain. Some of it is mine.
By not believing in God, I keep faith with the world's indifference. I love its beauty. I hate its suffering. I think both are perfectly real, because I experience them both, all the time. I do not see any reason to suspend judgment: I'm here, and I commit. I'm perfectly sincere and definite in my belief that there is no God. I can see that there could be comfort in believing otherwise, believing that all the suffering and death makes sense, that everyone gets what they deserve, and that existence works out in the end.
But to believe that would be to betray my actual experiences, and even without the aid of reasoned arguments, that’s reason enough not to believe.
This article available online at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/arc ... sm/381353/
MG Man wrote:AdamB sandwich
woohoo
AdamB wrote:Habit7 wrote:Are you not even going to acknowledge your errors? I am clearing up your assumptions and you are still compounding them. If this is your "side argument" it is likely your main argument is just as riddled with holes.
Go and read up. For one, purgatory is a Roman Catholic invention, it is not in the Bible. Unless you inform yourself your assumption will continue to be wrong.
Just like your god of the bible has been reinvented because the bible itself has been reinvented, edited, corrected....and hence, no longer valid as a source of guidance and legislation by the One True GOD.
meccalli wrote:AdamB wrote:Habit7 wrote:Are you not even going to acknowledge your errors? I am clearing up your assumptions and you are still compounding them. If this is your "side argument" it is likely your main argument is just as riddled with holes.
Go and read up. For one, purgatory is a Roman Catholic invention, it is not in the Bible. Unless you inform yourself your assumption will continue to be wrong.
Just like your god of the bible has been reinvented because the bible itself has been reinvented, edited, corrected....and hence, no longer valid as a source of guidance and legislation by the One True GOD.
you'll find a very nice model of purgatory in The Quran, 8shrugs*..how'd that come to be,..
Adam, you live your life for a one true god that weighs you on a scale, hoping that you're good deeds outweigh the unforgiven, un confessed, unknown sins you've committed in all your life. You enjoy living with that burden of never knowing what will happen on judgement day when you're weighed like a piece of meat. Having no assurance, no complete cleansing of sin, except you die for your God in an act of jihad.
Why do you think isis is so attractive to men and women, young and old muslims, ALL over the earth including our own country- They get to fight the jihad muhammed encouraged them to, a jihad of the Holy war. Assurance, that they will be sinless and guaranteed acceptance into paradise.
You say you believe in Isa, but why? What's he got to do in Islam? Yeshua said that he was the Son of God. You say he wasn't killed. But history tells us, Yeshua was convicted and brutally killed, hanged on cross. For an indictment, claiming to be God, Before Abraham was, I am. Blasphemy. No true servant of God would be so spineless and pitiful to elect someone else to die for what he had done like what the Quran says Isa did.
That's what a One True God does for us Adam, provides a way out, so you don't have to carry that burden around all your life. That's why Yeshua came, so that you and every person who has ever existed can be set free of ALL your sins, past,present and future.
He doesn't weigh us like Anubis in egypt, Minos in greece, karma and yama adaptations in hinduism and buddhism, Allah in Islam. Judaism even works on that principle of deeds and olam ha ba.
Only one gives you a way out and its only through Yeshua Ha Mashiach,
John 14:6 Yeshua said to him, “I Am the Living God, The Way and The Truth and The Life; no man comes to my Father but by me alone.”
ruffneck_12 wrote:I taut 42 was the answer
Ishwar wrote:....... sence ........ spirutal
Ishwar wrote:I wonder if ebola hit and everyone's money and logic meant nothing...what would happen to those with no sence of hope and faith.... I am sorry but as a nurse, i see life taken and brought into this world everyday...it is a spirutal aspect...this being said, i can not understand how someone could wake up everymorning to this beautiful island and say...there is no god's. At the end of the day, that is him/her opinion, but for me, i will continue to serve the ppl of trinidad and tobago as god wills it!
Blame the parents. Apparently it was their evil action of leaving their child alone with a priest that caused him to be raped.MG Man wrote:Ishwar wrote:I wonder if ebola hit and everyone's money and logic meant nothing...what would happen to those with no sence of hope and faith.... I am sorry but as a nurse, i see life taken and brought into this world everyday...it is a spirutal aspect...this being said, i can not understand how someone could wake up everymorning to this beautiful island and say...there is no god's. At the end of the day, that is him/her opinion, but for me, i will continue to serve the ppl of trinidad and tobago as god wills it!
heard god willed an old dude to shove his piggy in a schoolgirl's rectum...yay god
RBphoto wrote:Soooo... it is evil to leave your child alone with a "Man of God"...... makes a lot of sense.
ABA Trading LTD wrote:you ever hear of a spiritual healer/pundit/priest/imam telling someone "everything good with you, no worries, no need for prayers or puja or ritual"
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Duane 3NE 2NR, Google [Bot] and 62 guests
