flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Buddism (possibly offencive, beware)

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 12, 13, 14  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
rugxulo wrote:
Why do you believe one sentence over 1400 pages of God's word in the Bible??


Get some education friend. Youre illiterate and incapible of proper debate. Youre just a religious fanatic and it seems no one here really takes you serious. First get a higher education in philosophy, then some comparitive religion, next try some psychology and learn about religious fanaticism and indocterination (your condition). Next try some propositional calculus so youre able to properly debate and not just blabber hysterical fantasies.
Post 01 Feb 2007, 22:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8904
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
God made people dead everday Smile (maybe every hour)
some get chocked while eating, slaughtered, dead coz of accident, some tsunami, earthquake, illness and etc Smile

so, God shouldn't made people dead???? but the bad guy would rule the world and make the good guy suffer Razz
Post 01 Feb 2007, 23:15
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
vid wrote:
rugxulo: do you believe commands given by god in bible should be obeyed?


Not out of context, no. The civil and ceremonial aspect of the Mosaic law is something we Christians are not supposed to observe. It is the moral law (and the teachings of the Church) that we are obliged to follow (specifically, the Ten Commandments).

EDIT: God makes people dead? Then why does it say, "Watch or death will come like a thief in the night"? Would God call Himself a thief? I was thinking about that today, and that makes no sense. Certainly that would give the wrong idea, so I'm pretty certain that is incorrect. Plus, God told the Devil (in Job), "He is in your power; only spare his life."

You either blame God (via misguided anger) for allowing us to suffer (by giving us all free will and allowing us to suffer the consequences of our and others' actions), or you are wise and blame the devil alone for his own evil acts.

EDIT#2: Every priest learns lots of philosophy, but you certainly are denying that too. And yes, I'm illiterate, I can't read (can't you tell?). Laughing
Post 02 Feb 2007, 04:53
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
vid wrote:

No problem with that "word of god" contradicts itself, and is written by men too? Even church accepts this and says bible was only "inspired by god". Good things were "inspired", things which are contradicting are "man's error"


Okay, there is a definite misunderstanding here about what inspired means. It means a direct, concrete, tangible influence of God Himself wishing to tell His people something via revelation (which itself is finished, no more books will appear, but we don't necessarily fully understand it yet). He has told several people what He wanted to be made known (e.g., the prophets, like Isaiah), but He also allowed them to use human language to express it. However, it is definitely the Word of God (infallible). It is exactly as God intended to convey, and it did not come from man's own desire to write but God's will. This is not as literal writing from God as it was with the Ten Commandments (ark of the covenant), but it is indeed prompted by God for our benefit. Surely God can "hire" whoever He wants to do His "work", right? Does all their effort not count just because they aren't God themselves? Must He do everything by hand? God works through His creations oftentimes (because He likes it?). Face it, we are all called to do God's work, to serve Him and the world for His/our benefit. We should do good works and avoid all evil.

St. Paul (1 Timothy 6:17) wrote:

Tell the rich in the present age not to be proud and not to rely on so uncertain a thing as wealth but rather on God, who richly provides us with all things for our enjoyment. Tell them to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous, ready to share, thus accumulating as treasure a good foundation for the future, so as to win the life that is true life. O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you. Avoid profane babbling and the absurdities of so-called knowledge. By professing it, some people have deviated from the faith. Grace be with all of you.


However, there have also been false prophets (Balaam???), but we know them by the way they contradict that which has already been revealed.

2 Peter 2:15 wrote:

Abandoning the straight road, they have gone astray, following the road of Balaam, the son of Bosor, who loved payment for wrongdoing, but he received a rebuke for his own crime: a mute beast spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophet's madness


N.B. Please don't focus blindly on the talking animal alone, but try to understand the idea here.
Post 03 Feb 2007, 18:27
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
Quote:
However, there have also been false prophets (Balaam???), but we know them by the way they contradict that which has already been revealed.
I had a feeling that "true" prohpets contradict themselves too, don't they?
Post 03 Feb 2007, 20:32
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
rugxulo wrote:
...there is a definite misunderstanding here about what inspired means. It means a direct, concrete, tangible influence of God Himself wishing to tell His people something via revelation...However, there have also been false prophets (Balaam???), but we know them by the way they contradict that which has already been revealed.

Was Galileo "inspired" when he found "direct, concrete, tangible" and VERIFIABLE data refuting the geocentric nonsense in the "bible"? (Looking through his telescope, Galileo observed the moons of Jupiter rotating about that huge planet, just as the earth rotates about the sun--"heliocentrism" as demonstrated by Aristarchus, 2300 years ago.) No, Galileo was persecuted, arrested, brought before the Inquisition, threatened with death, AND OBLIGED TO RENOUNCE his heresy, for describing his observations on the behaviour of Jupiter's moons to his students at the university. Galileo's observations, directly contradicting the "bible" to the consternation of the Vatican's, and "rugxulo's" (and I am sure, the Muslims' and Jews') false belief in geocentrism--the biblical assertion that the earth is at the center of the solar system, REFUTED one of "god's" so called revelations. Galileo, in essence, was one of "rugxulo's" "false prophets", since he contradicted "that which has already been revealed." In my opinion, ALL religions, including Buddhism, fail this test: Expose a contradiction between dogma derived from obviously erroneous ancient texts, and contemporary explanations based upon recent experimentation or data, and then observe the reaction. Without exception, people of faith will retreat into their shell, like a turtle:
http://www.goldenstateimages.com/loggerhead.htm
Post 04 Feb 2007, 10:52
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Maverick



Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 251
Location: Citizen of the Universe
Maverick
There would be a lot to say also about evolutionism vs creationism. Blind religious people believe the Earth has 6000 years and has been created in seven days!! Incredible!! (with incredible I don't mean that theory (which is simply funny), but that many ppl *really* believe that giant bs, how could it be.. I can't believe they believe that!)
Post 04 Feb 2007, 12:03
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
tantrikwizard erroneously wrote:

Here is more evidence that either A) Jesus was not the messiah or B) prophecy of the messiah in the bible is wrong. Take your pick. Among getting the name wrong, there were several things the messiah was supposed to accomplish which jesus failed to do. Either jesus was no the messiah or the prophecy concerning the messiah was wrong (meaning a good portion of your porno bible is wrong). The orthodox messiah was supposed to reunite the jewish people, rebuild the sacred temple and bring peace on earth among other things. Jesus didn’t even get the name right, his name was 'jesus' not 'immanuel'. True the jewish people have a state again, it only took 2,000 years after jesus died, but there is still no temple and there is still no peace on earth.


Sorry, but the evidence you seek is actually in the Bible itself. You are looking in the wrong place if you disregard all this. It is not for nothing that people call it inspired.

Luke 2:8 wrote:

Now there were shepherds in that region living in the fields and keeping the night watch over their flock. The angel of the Lord appeared to them and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were struck with great fear. The angel said to them, "Do not be afraid; for behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For today in the city of David a savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find an infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger." And suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying:
"Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests." When the angels went away from them to heaven, the shepherds said to one another, "Let us go, then, to Bethlehem to see this thing that has taken place, which the Lord has made known to us." So they went in haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the infant lying in the manger.


Luke 22:24 wrote:

Then an argument broke out among them about which of them should be regarded as the greatest. He said to them, "The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them and those in authority over them are addressed as 'Benefactors'; but among you it shall not be so. Rather, let the greatest among you be as the youngest, and the leader as the servant. For who is greater: the one seated at table or the one who serves? Is it not the one seated at table? I am among you as the one who serves. It is you who have stood by me in my trials; and I confer a kingdom on you, just as my Father has conferred one on me, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom; and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.


John 18:33 wrote:

So Pilate went back into the praetorium and summoned Jesus and said to him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" Jesus answered, "Do you say this on your own or have others told you about me?" Pilate answered, "I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?" Jesus answered, "My kingdom does not belong to this world. If my kingdom did belong to this world, my attendants (would) be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not here." So Pilate said to him, "Then you are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say I am a king. For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice." Pilate said to him, "What is truth?" When he had said this, he again went out to the Jews and said to them, "I find no guilt in him. But you have a custom that I release one prisoner to you at Passover. Do you want me to release to you the King of the Jews?" They cried out again, "Not this one but Barabbas!" Now Barabbas was a revolutionary.


Luke 4:14 and Isaiah 61 wrote:

Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news of him spread throughout the whole region. He taught in their synagogues and was praised by all. He came to Nazareth, where he had grown up, and went according to his custom into the synagogue on the sabbath day. He stood up to read and was handed a scroll of the prophet Isaiah. He unrolled the scroll and found the passage where it was written: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring glad tidings to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord." Rolling up the scroll, he handed it back to the attendant and sat down, and the eyes of all in the synagogue looked intently at him. He said to them, "Today this scripture passage is fulfilled in your hearing."


John 4:16 wrote:

Jesus said to her, "Go call your husband and come back." The woman answered and said to him, "I do not have a husband." Jesus answered her, "You are right in saying, 'I do not have a husband.' For you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. What you have said is true." The woman said to him, "Sir, I can see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain; 8 but you people say that the place to worship is in Jerusalem." Jesus said to her, "Believe me, woman, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You people worship what you do not understand; we worship what we understand, because salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth; and indeed the Father seeks such people to worship him. God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and truth."
The woman said to him, "I know that the Messiah is coming, the one called the Anointed; when he comes, he will tell us everything." Jesus said to her, "I am he, the one who is speaking with you." At that moment his disciples returned, and were amazed that he was talking with a woman, but still no one said, "What are you looking for?" or "Why are you talking with her?"
The woman left her water jar and went into the town and said to the people,
"Come see a man who told me everything I have done. Could he possibly be the Messiah?"


Isaiah 52:7 wrote:

How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings glad tidings, Announcing peace, bearing good news, announcing salvation, and saying to Zion, "Your God is King!"


Psalm 146 wrote:

Hallelujah! Praise the LORD, my soul; I shall praise the LORD all my life, sing praise to my God while I live. I Put no trust in princes, in mere mortals powerless to save. When they breathe their last, they return to the earth; that day all their planning comes to nothing. Happy those whose help is Jacob's God, whose hope is in the LORD, their God, The maker of heaven and earth, the seas and all that is in them, Who keeps faith forever, secures justice for the oppressed, gives food to the hungry. The LORD sets prisoners free; the LORD gives sight to the blind. The LORD raises up those who are bowed down; the LORD loves the righteous. The LORD protects the stranger, sustains the orphan and the widow, but thwarts the way of the wicked. The LORD shall reign forever, your God, Zion, through all generations! Hallelujah!


Isaiah 11:1 wrote:

But a shoot shall sprout from the stump of Jesse, and from his roots a bud shall blossom. The spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him: a spirit of wisdom and of understanding, A spirit of counsel and of strength, a spirit of knowledge and of fear of the LORD, and his delight shall be the fear of the LORD. Not by appearance shall he judge, nor by hearsay shall he decide, But he shall judge the poor with justice, and decide aright for the land's afflicted. He shall strike the ruthless with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked. Justice shall be the band around his waist, and faithfulness a belt upon his hips.


St. Peter (Acts 2:22) wrote:

You who are Israelites, hear these words. Jesus the Nazorean was a man commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, which God worked through him in your midst, as you yourselves know. This man, delivered up by the set plan and foreknowledge of God, you killed, using lawless men to crucify him. But God raised him up, releasing him from the throes of death, because it was impossible for him to be held by it. For David says of him: 'I saw the Lord ever before me, with him at my right hand I shall not be disturbed. Therefore my heart has been glad and my tongue has exulted; my flesh, too, will dwell in hope, because you will not abandon my soul to the netherworld, nor will you suffer your holy one to see corruption. You have made known to me the paths of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence.' My brothers, one can confidently say to you about the patriarch David that he died and was buried, and his tomb is in our midst to this day. But since he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants upon his throne,
he foresaw and spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that neither was he abandoned to the netherworld nor did his flesh see corruption. God raised this Jesus; of this we are all witnesses. Exalted at the right hand of God, he received the promise of the holy Spirit from the Father and poured it forth, as you (both) see and hear. For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool."' Therefore let the whole house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified." Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and they asked Peter and the other apostles, "What are we to do, my brothers?" Peter (said) to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call." He testified with many other arguments, and was exhorting them, "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation." Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand persons were added that day.


There are gifts of the Holy Spirit (piety, "fear of the Lord") and fruits of the Holy Spirit (one of them being peace).
Post 07 Feb 2007, 14:34
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
rugxulo wrote:
tantrikwizard erroneously wrote:

Here is more evidence that either A) Jesus was not the messiah or B) prophecy of the messiah in the bible is wrong. Take your pick. Among getting the name wrong, there were several things the messiah was supposed to accomplish which jesus failed to do. Either jesus was no the messiah or the prophecy concerning the messiah was wrong (meaning a good portion of your porno bible is wrong). The orthodox messiah was supposed to reunite the jewish people, rebuild the sacred temple and bring peace on earth among other things. Jesus didn’t even get the name right, his name was 'jesus' not 'immanuel'. True the jewish people have a state again, it only took 2,000 years after jesus died, but there is still no temple and there is still no peace on earth.


Sorry, but the evidence you seek is actually in the Bible itself. You are looking in the wrong place if you disregard all this. It is not for nothing that people call it inspired.


I surely hope you understand the stupidity of your argument. You are saying the bible is true because the bible says so. That is equal to saying Mein Kampf is true because Mein Kampf says so. Do you fall for the fanaticism of Mein Kampf too? With equal logical consistency I can say my diary is the word of god because my diary says so. Does this make me god? Get some education my illiterate friend.
Post 08 Feb 2007, 13:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
You basically say, "Where's the evidence?", and yet even though part of the evidence is many peoples' testimony in the Bible, you refute it. Do other peoples' lives not serve as an example? Are they really just trying to fool you? This is maybe not 100% foolproof to convince you, but it should serve as evidence that it is worthy (in some peoples' eyes) of being believed. To refute the entire Bible would be a bit, erm, silly (if not impossible) since it refers to many, many things. You may not agree with it, but it is there for a reason: to be a record of truth. Just because you disagree and say everyone is lying does NOT mean there is no evidence.

Like I said, God is transcendant. This is not a copout, but it is an actual reason why we are not face to face with Him right now (plus "original sin"'s result). Face it, the Bible is actually a collection of books, not just one big lump. They are co-authored in different times by different people in different languages (but "inspired" by the Holy Spirit, who never lies). It is many accounts of God's work, and it is not meant to be ignored.

Should you not accept my answers just because you don't believe? At least understand that some people DO have answers to your questions, even if you refute them. It's easy to deny sometimes, but you cannot inadvertently deny it forever.

Matthew 5:8 wrote:

Blessed are the clean of heart, for they will see God.


None of us are probably pure enough (or, at least, not me). And yet, the saying is that "When man is at his most sinful, God comes closest to that person, willing to die for them". He does not leave us orphans. We are not abandoned. I can attest to this, too.

1 Corinthians 15:3 wrote:

For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried; that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures; that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. After that he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one born abnormally, he appeared to me. For I am the least of the apostles, not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me has not been ineffective. Indeed, I have toiled harder than all of them; not I, however, but the grace of God (that is) with me.


And yet, some of them still lost faith after that. So, God appearing would not necessarily prove or fix anything. In other words, God knows what He's doing, even if it seems wrong to us. I can fully agree with this based upon my own experiences.
Post 08 Feb 2007, 23:16
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
Quote:
hey are co-authored in different times by different people in different languages (but "inspired" by the Holy Spirit, who never lies)

didn't he lie about geocentrism?
Post 08 Feb 2007, 23:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
vid wrote:
Quote:
hey are co-authored in different times by different people in different languages (but "inspired" by the Holy Spirit, who never lies)

didn't he lie about geocentrism?


No. God does not lie. God exists. God answers prayers. I cannot state this more plainly.
Post 09 Feb 2007, 00:29
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
rugxulo wrote:
You basically say, "Where's the evidence?", and yet even though part of the evidence is many peoples' testimony in the Bible, you refute it.


Illiterate child, think before you voice nonsense opinions. According to you, a person's testimony is valid evidence of their belief. Get a clue. You will get differing testimonies from every religion and they will testify that their belief is the right one. Being that testimonies differ, your testimony is no more proof of your fairytale beliefs than that of the ancient egyptians, romans, greeks, mayans, hindus, muslims or orthadox jews. They all testify to their 'truth' and you will refute it. Your testimony may have something to do with your personal psychology, but it is not valid evidence for you kookoo beliefs, just as the testimony of any cult member is not very creditable.

rugxulo wrote:
Do other peoples' lives not serve as an example? Are they really just trying to fool you?


No you blabbering moron, Jeffrey Domar was a christian, Jim Joans was a christian. The KKK is christianity. If these people's lifes are an example of christianity and your actions are any testimony to the effects of christianity then the cult should be banned and it's members inprisoned when attempting to spread this maddness. You have the abductive, deductive and inductive reasoning of a drooling mongoloid my illiterate friend, these are not the results that should appear on the resume of someone trying to persuade people.

rugxulo wrote:
To refute the entire Bible would be a bit, erm, silly (if not impossible) since it refers to many, many things.


Nonsense idiot child. For something that kookoos uphold as irrifutable and absolute truth of the cosmos, it must withstand ALL criticsm. If it cannot withstand the simpliest criticism then it cannot be truth. It's not even logically consistent therefore its unworth as evidence. Harry Potter talks about a lot of stuff too, Mother Goose has a lot of facts in it. That doesn't mean that Harry Potter and Mother Goose are true books, theyre just books with some facts in them. You need to get some education in philosophy before attempting to argue for the evidence of the bible or christianity. You don't even have an elementary form of logic, rather, logic is completely absent from your arguments. The bible is self-contradictory and it takes no intellegence to disprove the biblical accounts of god as impossible. Refuting the bible is not an impossibility, its actually very simple, any child can identify the contradictions.

rugxulo wrote:
You may not agree with it, but it is there for a reason: to be a record of truth. Just because you disagree and say everyone is lying does NOT mean there is no evidence.


Are you talking about genesis that talks about 4 legged birds? Is this absolute truth you kookoo? Sure there are some facts in the bible just as there is a lot of fantasy. Being that there is known falsifications, fabrications, speculation and contradiction, it is not a creditable source. The bible is not creditable evidence for the validity of the bible. Just as my diary is not creditable evidence for the validty of my diary. If you blindly fall for my diary then you must accept that I am god, afterall, my diary says so. You wouldn't be so stupid as to fall for my dairies accounts without first validating them, but you are clearly stupid enough to fall for the bible's.

rugxulo wrote:
Like I said, God is transcendant. This is not a copout, but it is an actual reason why we are not face to face with Him right now (plus "original sin"'s result).


Care to back up this nonsense with some creditable evidence? (FYI, Bible is not creditable evidence for the bible)

rugxulo wrote:
Face it, the Bible is actually a collection of books, not just one big lump. They are co-authored in different times by different people in different languages (but "inspired" by the Holy Spirit, who never lies). It is many accounts of God's work, and it is not meant to be ignored.


There is zero creditable evidence for this nonsense. (The bible is not a creditable source for the validity of the bible) Get a grip my illiterate friend, there is zero evidence for any god, none what-so-ever, just the opinions of some kookoos. That is why it is 'faith based' and not 'evidence based'

rugxulo wrote:
Should you not accept my answers just because you don't believe?


Yes idiot child, do not listen to the rambling of kookoos without evidence. (the bible is not creditable evidence for the validity of the bible.)

rugxulo wrote:
At least understand that some people DO have answers to your questions, even if you refute them. It's easy to deny sometimes, but you cannot inadvertently deny it forever.


Do not make the assumption that I have questions idiot child. I have no questions, I'm well learned in all the sects of christianity amongst other cults. I'm a shade tree philosopher and learned in several philosophies, theologies and ideologies. There is absolutely nothing you can teach me. I have debated this topic with people much more intellegent than you. You have got to be the stupidiest person I have ever debated on this topic. I have debated same with philosophers, scholars, scientists, reputable ministers and promenent leaders in the churches. You dont even have a primative form of logic, logic is completely absent in your hysterical blabber. These debates always end the same: fact: there is zero evidence for any god. (bible is not creditable evidence for validity of the bible)

rugxulo wrote:
None of us are probably pure enough (or, at least, not me). And yet, the saying is that "When man is at his most sinful, God comes closest to that person, willing to die for them".


Well then you should run out and rape and murder, collect a bunch of kiddy porn and engage in bestiality so you can get closer to this jehova weirdo.

rugxulo wrote:
So, God appearing would not necessarily prove or fix anything. In other words, God knows what He's doing, even if it seems wrong to us. I can fully agree with this based upon my own experiences.


There is zero evidence for this idiot child. Your experiences are not creditable evidence. I can make you experience hot in the freezing cold. I can make you experience intense fear in perfect safety. Experiences are not creditable evidence and the bible is not creditable evidence. Your experience is evidence that you are capibile of having experiences, that is all. Get some education my illiterate friend, you are living in an age of science, not of fairytale.

Additionally, god appearing would prove and fix a lot, he could provide conclusive irrefutable evidence but he does not, he doesn't know what he's doing.

I noticed you conviently overlooked the evidence that either jesus was not the messiah or the prophecy concerning the messiah was wrong. You must pick one or the other. I pointed out 3 things among several that jesus failed to do as the messiah. 1) he failed to reunite the jews. 2) he failed to rebuild the temple (there is a muslim mosque on temple mount) and 3) he did not bring peace on earth he did not live as a king and rule the jewish people forever. This is why orthodox jews reject him as the messiah, he failed to fullfill their prophecy. You must either accept that the prophecy was wrong or jesus was not the messiah. The reality is there are no less than 100 wars going on in the world at present, there is a muslim mosque on temple mount and a good number of jews are not christian who do not accept jesus as their messiah. Clearly he either was not the messiah or the prophecy was wrong, take your pick. You cannot use the bible to dispute these claims because reality trumphs the bible. This is the situation of reality at present: Jesus failed to bring peace on earth, he failed to rebuild the temple and he failed to unite the jews.

Without your bible you have nothing. You've been programmed and indocterinated to believe selective portions of the bible and indocterinated to believe portions of the bible are the end-all authority. I challenge you to set aside your bible (which is not creditable evidence for the bible anyway) and attempt to defend your position. Face the facts, there is no creditable evidence for your beliefs and no rational reason why anyone should fall for it, just as there is no creditable evidence for my diary being the word of god and no rational person would fall for me being the creator god. The very weak argument that fanatics use most common is that nature is proof of god. I hear this one all the time. Nature doesn't need a creator, in fact, science tells us that energy is never created, so nature rather evidence against god. If everything that exists must have been created, and god exists, then who created god? This is very elementary logic, fanatics will say god does not need a creator, that he is eternal. If god does not need a creator then why must nature? You can give no rational or logical reason for the very basic questions challenging the kookoo fantasy of god without refering to your bible (which is not creditable evidence for the validity of the bible). Get an education my illiterate friend. Start off with some philosophy, then some comparitive religion. Next try some propositional calculus so you can learn how to properly formulate and refute arguments using logic.
Post 09 Feb 2007, 01:43
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
You definitely do NOT know what you're talking about. Am I really surprised? Anyone who (intentionally or otherwise) says God does not exist is wrong. No matter how they try, they cannot change it. It doesn't matter if they pull the wool completely over their own eyes either. The truth still remains. However, I am not amused. Pardon me for not idly sitting back and allowing error to continue. Can I convince anyone? Probably not if they are massively stuck in their ways. I never claimed that ability. You certainly don't sound happy, though.

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
You basically say, "Where's the evidence?", and yet even though part of the evidence is many peoples' testimony in the Bible, you refute it.


Illiterate child, think before you voice nonsense opinions. According to you, a person's testimony is valid evidence of their belief. Get a clue. You will get differing testimonies from every religion and they will testify that their belief is the right one. Being that testimonies differ, your testimony is no more proof of your fairytale beliefs than that of the ancient egyptians, romans, greeks, mayans, hindus, muslims or orthadox jews. They all testify to their 'truth' and you will refute it. Your testimony may have something to do with your personal psychology, but it is not valid evidence for you kookoo beliefs, just as the testimony of any cult member is not very creditable.


When someone says something is true, that is definitely a good (and acceptable) reason to believe them. "We want proof" is not the way we live. We accept many things (especially in science!) without having seen them personally. Not everything is a lie. Duh. (FYI, "martyr" means "witness", and if you can't trust an eyewitness account, then you are definitely naive.)

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
Do other peoples' lives not serve as an example? Are they really just trying to fool you?

No you blabbering moron, Jeffrey Domar was a christian, Jim Joans was a christian. The KKK is christianity. If these people's lifes are an example of christianity and your actions are any testimony to the effects of christianity then the cult should be banned and it's members inprisoned when attempting to spread this maddness. You have the abductive, deductive and inductive reasoning of a drooling mongoloid my illiterate friend, these are not the results that should appear on the resume of someone trying to persuade people.


There are good examples and bad examples. A virus is a poor example (IMO) of Windows programming, so I don't brag about how many there are. I'd rather focus on those programs which actually DO something useful. You know as well as I do that people are not perfect. How does that mean God doesn't exist?? God does not force anybody to do anything. Just because evil actions occur, you cannot blame God. (And anybody who doesn't at least try to live a decent Christian life is not truly Christian, they are "friends in name only", remember?)

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
To refute the entire Bible would be a bit, erm, silly (if not impossible) since it refers to many, many things.

Nonsense idiot child. For something that kookoos uphold as irrifutable and absolute truth of the cosmos, it must withstand ALL criticsm. If it cannot withstand the simpliest criticism then it cannot be truth. It's not even logically consistent therefore its unworth as evidence. Harry Potter talks about a lot of stuff too, Mother Goose has a lot of facts in it. That doesn't mean that Harry Potter and Mother Goose are true books, theyre just books with some facts in them. You need to get some education in philosophy before attempting to argue for the evidence of the bible or christianity. You don't even have an elementary form of logic, rather, logic is completely absent from your arguments. The bible is self-contradictory and it takes no intellegence to disprove the biblical accounts of god as impossible. Refuting the bible is not an impossibility, its actually very simple, any child can identify the contradictions.


The truth is not always obvious. Just because YOU don't agree with it doesn't mean it isn't true. Illusion of knowledge is a dangerous thing. "Philosophy?" I've told you over and over again that many Christians have studied philosophy (St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas). Me personally? I don't put a lot of faith in things like "I only know that I know nothing" or "Good and evil are relative" because I've seen/experienced/learned that those ideas are garbage. It almost seems like you idolize science as all mighty and irrefutable. How is that different from what I do? Oh yeah, because one is God, and one isn't. Sorry if you're blind to the truth. It really doesn't matter, though, what either of us says online here, because the truth isn't going anywhere.

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
You may not agree with it, but it is there for a reason: to be a record of truth. Just because you disagree and say everyone is lying does NOT mean there is no evidence.

Are you talking about genesis that talks about 4 legged birds? Is this absolute truth you kookoo? Sure there are some facts in the bible just as there is a lot of fantasy. Being that there is known falsifications, fabrications, speculation and contradiction, it is not a creditable source. The bible is not creditable evidence for the validity of the bible. Just as my diary is not creditable evidence for the validty of my diary. If you blindly fall for my diary then you must accept that I am god, afterall, my diary says so. You wouldn't be so stupid as to fall for my dairies accounts without first validating them, but you are clearly stupid enough to fall for the bible's.


No, the Bible itself is not God. But anyone who says, "I know first hand that the entire Bible is false" is just full of it. Does your precious "science" have a time machine? If so, go back in time and look around. Ask people what's going on. Then write it down so I can read ... oh wait, already been done. What's the response? "We don't believe, we don't believe, show us, show us!" Okay, guess how many times you can say that before it gets old?

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
Like I said, God is transcendant. This is not a copout, but it is an actual reason why we are not face to face with Him right now (plus "original sin"'s result).

Care to back up this nonsense with some creditable evidence? (FYI, Bible is not creditable evidence for the bible)


What would it take for you to believe? Obviously, a lot. Or maybe nothing would convince you. Face it, your unbelief does not (and cannot) prove anything. Strange that you think otherwise.

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
Face it, the Bible is actually a collection of books, not just one big lump. They are co-authored in different times by different people in different languages (but "inspired" by the Holy Spirit, who never lies). It is many accounts of God's work, and it is not meant to be ignored.

There is zero creditable evidence for this nonsense. (The bible is not a creditable source for the validity of the bible) Get a grip my illiterate friend, there is zero evidence for any god, none what-so-ever, just the opinions of some kookoos. That is why it is 'faith based' and not 'evidence based'


Uh, I just recently said that the Bible was written in pieces, in different situations, by different people (although inspired). Therefore, to deny the existence of God, you have to call every one of these people "deluded kookoos". That's a bold statement. Don't be so quick to judge. "I've investigated and learned it all." Uh, no. The more you learn, the more you find out that you DON'T know. If you think you know it all, you're fooling yourself. Don't let what you already know prevent you from learning the truth.

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
Should you not accept my answers just because you don't believe?

Yes idiot child, do not listen to the rambling of kookoos without evidence. (the bible is not creditable evidence for the validity of the bible.)


What makes them "kookoo"? Believing differently than you? That doesn't make them clinically insane. That just means they believe in something that you can't see. And you are way, way overboard in your unbelief because you consider it impossible to believe. Seriously, what part of your brain works so well that you can discount so many others as "kookoo"? What makes you so superior in that you can diagnose them from far away?

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
At least understand that some people DO have answers to your questions, even if you refute them. It's easy to deny sometimes, but you cannot inadvertently deny it forever.

Do not make the assumption that I have questions idiot child. I have no questions, I'm well learned in all the sects of christianity amongst other cults. I'm a shade tree philosopher and learned in several philosophies, theologies and ideologies. There is absolutely nothing you can teach me. I have debated this topic with people much more intellegent than you. You have got to be the stupidiest person I have ever debated on this topic. I have debated same with philosophers, scholars, scientists, reputable ministers and promenent leaders in the churches. You dont even have a primative form of logic, logic is completely absent in your hysterical blabber. These debates always end the same: fact: there is zero evidence for any god. (bible is not creditable evidence for validity of the bible)


"Learned" or confused? You are definitely not "well learned" if any priest could debunk you (or even me, a much less educated person). Nothing I can teach you? "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." I can't make you accept anything. All I can do is tell you. What you do with your life is beyond my control (and that's how it should be). Nothing to teach you? Well, "life is the school of hard knocks", so learn the easy way or learn the hard way.

Logic? Intelligence? You don't strictly need either. Truth can exist outside of a creature which has neither (believe it or not). I think a miracle (immediate response to prayer beyond human science) is a quite definitive proof of God's existence. And there have been many. But feel free to deny your senses, too.

(Spelling errors ignored. Aren't we all tired of that old tactic??)

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
None of us are probably pure enough (or, at least, not me). And yet, the saying is that "When man is at his most sinful, God comes closest to that person, willing to die for them".

Well then you should run out and rape and murder, collect a bunch of kiddy porn and engage in bestiality so you can get closer to this jehova weirdo.


No. It means God is willing to still (after all His suffering) be loving, patient, kind to someone who clearly does NOT deserve it. He does NOT like sin and would prefer to avoid being around it. But, "love covers all offenses". He is (actually) looking out for us, not only Himself!

tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
So, God appearing would not necessarily prove or fix anything. In other words, God knows what He's doing, even if it seems wrong to us. I can fully agree with this based upon my own experiences.

There is zero evidence for this idiot child. Your experiences are not creditable evidence. I can make you experience hot in the freezing cold. I can make you experience intense fear in perfect safety. Experiences are not creditable evidence and the bible is not creditable evidence. Your experience is evidence that you are capibile of having experiences, that is all. Get some education my illiterate friend, you are living in an age of science, not of fairytale.


Experiences don't count? Then what do you rely on?? Ideas are formed, based on experiences (empirical?) and trials. If I see someone act nicely towards me, I respond. I don't ignore that person. That person is worthy of attention. Shall I deny His kindness?

tantrikwizard wrote:

Additionally, god appearing would prove and fix a lot, he could provide conclusive irrefutable evidence but he does not, he doesn't know what he's doing.


Uh, Gospels gospels gospels. Read them, they tell all. He did many, many things. He did fix MANY things, even beyond what we humans would ask for. He knows what He's doing. All it takes is for you to believe in Him and follow Him. Face it, somebody had some serious guts to write a heavy collection of books about God and God's plan. Willing to die for it? Even more guts. But, even more so, God Himself doing it all for our benefit (such a class act, He is).

tantrikwizard wrote:

I noticed you conviently overlooked the evidence that either jesus was not the messiah or the prophecy concerning the messiah was wrong. You must pick one or the other. I pointed out 3 things among several that jesus failed to do as the messiah. 1) he failed to reunite the jews. 2) he failed to rebuild the temple (there is a muslim mosque on temple mount) and 3) he did not bring peace on earth he did not live as a king and rule the jewish people forever. This is why orthodox jews reject him as the messiah, he failed to fullfill their prophecy. You must either accept that the prophecy was wrong or jesus was not the messiah. The reality is there are no less than 100 wars going on in the world at present, there is a muslim mosque on temple mount and a good number of jews are not christian who do not accept jesus as their messiah. Clearly he either was not the messiah or the prophecy was wrong, take your pick. You cannot use the bible to dispute these claims because reality trumphs the bible. This is the situation of reality at present: Jesus failed to bring peace on earth, he failed to rebuild the temple and he failed to unite the jews.


Read the second-to-last post I put in this thread. That was a direct response about the Messiah (Jesus the Christ).

Pick one or the other? Obviously you forgot another possibility: that YOU are wrong!. The Bible itself is self-referencing in order to prove fulfillment of prophecies and educate us about God's nature. Jesus has been described as fully fulfilling God's plan and even reflecting God Himself on Earth. You cannot easily call every author in the Bible a "kookoo" because were all different people in different times. What makes them so "kookoo"? Again, only your big mouth. Nothing else.

tantrikwizard wrote:

Without your bible you have nothing. You've been programmed and indocterinated to believe selective portions of the bible and indocterinated to believe portions of the bible are the end-all authority. I challenge you to set aside your bible (which is not creditable evidence for the bible anyway) and attempt to defend your position.


No, without God I have nothing. "Apart from you, there is no good in me." (Psalms) Separation from God is bad, and no good can come from it (since all good comes from God). "Set aside" the Word of God? Why? Just because I can't convince someone? I don't care if you don't believe. It doesn't make it less true. Just because you deny the Bible's accuracy doesn't mean God didn't write it. Maybe (gasp) you don't understand it. Shocked Imagine that. Someone misunderstanding something. Alert the media!

tantrikwizard wrote:

Face the facts, there is no creditable evidence for your beliefs and no rational reason why anyone should fall for it, just as there is no creditable evidence for my diary being the word of god and no rational person would fall for me being the creator god. The very weak argument that fanatics use most common is that nature is proof of god. I hear this one all the time. Nature doesn't need a creator, in fact, science tells us that energy is never created, so nature rather evidence against god.


Science is not a person. You believe in that which has no brain? No, but you believe what people have said. The only difference between our views is who we listen to and what we've seen. Nature doesn't need a creator? It's (mostly) logical, organized, follows a pattern. It doesn't necessarily prove God's existence, but only God can do that (by making Himself known: He's transcendant, remember? You cannot sense Him unless He lets you (ahem, St. Thomas after the Resurrection, see Gospels)).

tantrikwizard wrote:

If everything that exists must have been created, and god exists, then who created god? This is very elementary logic, fanatics will say god does not need a creator, that he is eternal. If god does not need a creator then why must nature?


Because God existed before anything else. That is part of the definition of God. Since nature came later, it had to be directly or indirectly created by God.

tantrikwizard wrote:

You can give no rational or logical reason for the very basic questions challenging the kookoo fantasy of god without refering to your bible (which is not creditable evidence for the validity of the bible). Get an education my illiterate friend. Start off with some philosophy, then some comparitive religion. Next try some propositional calculus so you can learn how to properly formulate and refute arguments using logic.


Yes, an education, self-described geniuses know everything, there is nothing more to learn, ever. We have peaked as a civilization, and everything coming later will pale in comparison. ("They'll never find another place to hide cheese on a pizza!") Everything education says is true, and everyone else is wrong. All hail philosophy, too! It must be right because it says "All I know is that I know nothing"! Sounds irrefutable to me! Guess that proves everything else is wrong about everything.

Be careful in relying on your own brilliance, it will fail you. Then what will you do? Who will hear your cries? (Guess who: starts with "gee" and ends with "odd".)
Post 09 Feb 2007, 05:55
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
MichaelH



Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 402
MichaelH
Quote:

Who will hear your cries?


Given that you've admitted you can't hear lyrics in songs rugxulo, I suspect definitely not you Laughing

Well rugxulo, even though you're completely insane Smile I think you're a likeable chap and in the end for me that's all that counts. I hope you can forgive us "sinners" for not seeing "the truth" and can move on cause all this anger although entertaining, can't be good for you.

Respect Michael
Post 09 Feb 2007, 08:53
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
rugxulo wrote:
Because God existed before anything else. That is part of the definition of God. Since nature came later, it had to be directly or indirectly created by God.
Does this thought, dear friend, originate with the jewish torah--"genesis", written by homo sapiens? Your writing style suggests that you view your sentence above as a FACTUAL statement, rather than a simple belief on your part. I believe that you are both very intelligent, and very kind. It is my belief. I have no personal experience to support this belief. For all I know you are a serial rapist and axe murderer. If I write a document asserting that "rugxulo" is a great guy, does that make it a fact? Shouldn't we separate tom's OPINIONS, from verifiable data? You BELIEVE that "god" came before nature, others believe that "god" is nature. Those of us continuing this offensive Buddhism thread, hope to offer an alternative vision for your consideration--a vision in which rational, careful, verifiable experience--rather than gossip, rumors, and frankly, IGNORANCE-- guides one's daily life. When vid challenges me to provide REFERENCES for some of my more outlandish proclamations, he isn't SIMPLY trying to elucidate the truth of the matter, he is also seeking to help me. You may find "tantrikwizard"'s rebukes a trifle harsh, but he too, is trying to help you, in his own way, or if you prefer, (after reading His diary,) in His own way!
rugxulo wrote:
No. It means God is willing to still (after all His suffering) be loving, patient, kind to someone who clearly does NOT deserve it. He does NOT like sin and would prefer to avoid being around it. But, "love covers all offenses".

Can you not see, friend, that you have committed two huge errors here:
1. you ascribe to a supernatural power HUMAN attributes. What need has an omnipotent being, (with power so great that "he" can cause our solar system to vanish in the blink of an eye--another human metaphor!),) of mortal human qualities? You provide this "supreme being" with an anthropomorphic dimension, not because "he" requires them, but because YOU require that "he" possess human attributes. This is the same situation the pagan Roman emperor Constantine faced, when he decided to assign the winter solstice to Jesus for his birthday...He knew that ordinary Roman citizens could comprehend that particular date, and thereby accept the alien jewish rigamarole more easily....
2. Let's stick with "rugxulo's" logic for a moment, and assume that "god" exists. Then, who are YOU, "rugxulo", to behave so audaciously, by interpreting, or explaining to us ignorant FASM forumers, "his" motivations? Are you someone so unique on this planet, that you dare to offer to us mere mortal FASM forumers an explanation of "his" thoughts?
I believe that you, "rugxulo", are a decent and wise person, possibly even humble, but, you err in terms of your OWN doctrines, if you now assert to us, with such immodesty, knowledge of what this supposed supreme being "wants", or "needs"--what "he" "likes". The moment you claim to "understand" what "god" wants or thinks or feels, at that moment, you move into the sphere of "special" people. Throughout history, there have been many such "special" people: people who felt themselves superior to others, and therefore could act accordingly, often with catastrophic consequences, particularly for those who thought or behaved contrarily. NO. of course you do not consider yourself to be so special. Correct? You are not insane, am I right? No, you point to the bible as your authority to explain "god's" desires. You do not instruct us because you have unique, special attributes which the rest of us lack, YES??? Your authority, your instruction set manual, the "facts", the data, are represented by the bible, not by some special talent for communicating with supernatural beings, am I right here, "rugxulo"??? If I am correct, and you do not ascribe to yourself special skills in communication with supernatural beings, then, we may focus all our attention on the bible itself, rather than debating "god's" supposed "suffering". All you have to do, to gain some converts on the FASM forum, is show how the "bible", the same book which asserts that jews are the "chosen" people, is a more reliable source of facts than any other religious hokum. Hence, we have NO NEED for any further quotations from the bible itself, "rugxulo", you are simply wasting bandwidth for naught, since it is the bible's supposed veracity which we challenge. What we do need, or more precisely, what you need, friend, is evidence, not quotations, that offers credible support for the many fantastic assertions of this jewish propaganda. Is there something, NOT found in the bible, which, as a simple example, illustrates the veracity of "noah's flood"? We may soon witness ourselves, another one, if global warming continues unabated...Gautama was right, if we wish to remain on high ground, we better moderate our activity, particularly our reproductive activity, else face massive flooding. Has anyone estimated the amount of heat generated by 10 billion people, compared to that generated by 1 billion people? I believe it is ten times more, but I am not sure. I need data, not faith.
Smile
Post 09 Feb 2007, 11:29
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
tom tobias wrote:
You are not insane, am I right? No, you point to the bible as your authority to explain "god's" desires. You do not instruct us because you have unique, special attributes which the rest of us lack, YES??? Your authority, your instruction set manual, the "facts", the data, are represented by the bible, not by some special talent for communicating with supernatural beings, am I right here, "rugxulo"??? If I am correct, and you do not ascribe to yourself special skills in communication with supernatural beings, then, we may focus all our attention on the bible itself, rather than debating "god's" supposed "suffering". All you have to do, to gain some converts on the FASM forum, is show how the "bible", the same book which asserts that jews are the "chosen" people, is a more reliable source of facts than any other religious hokum. Hence, we have NO NEED for any further quotations from the bible itself, "rugxulo", you are simply wasting bandwidth for naught, since it is the bible's supposed veracity which we challenge. What we do need, or more precisely, what you need, friend, is evidence, not quotations, that offers credible support for the many fantastic assertions of this jewish propaganda.


You are correct. I do not (need to) receive messages from God directly. I am no different from anyone else in this forum. As I have mentioned, my faith disappeared for many years, and I only came back to it fairly recently (but it was more God's doing than mine, I must admit).

Yes, in a way, I am wasting words, at least, in that words alone solve nothing. I quote you the Bible because I rely on it. It's much easier to quote selected pieces that fit together (according to my limited understanding) than just say, "Read the Bible!" (and then hear from you: "Where? How much? What does it mean?").

My main point was that the Bible does indeed fit together although written at different times by different (inspired) people. Of course, if you don't believe in the prophecy of a Messiah, you won't believe in its fulfillment. In that case, I am definitely going to prove nothing to you except maybe showing you that the Bible isn't all gibberish. It does fit together, and that's not just my imagination.

BTW, there is hardly any proof or data that someone like me can offer on an online forum besides text. That's almost entirely what this forum is for: information. What else did you honestly expect from me? (Okay, well, now that I think about it, I guess other multimedia may help, but I'm already aware of your skepticism. Oh well, guess I'll point out one example anyways.)

Ever hear of Our Lady of Guadalupe? I guess a picture would be worth a 1000 words, but personally, I can't tell what the frell it looks like. But I still believe in her appearance anyways (because God does not lie and has answered many prayers).

Wikipedia wrote:

Some consider it miraculous that the tilma maintains its structural integrity after nearly 500 years. In addition to withstanding the elements the tilma has also resisted a 1791 ammonia spill and a 1921 bomb blast.


Face it, you can in theory deny everything. Just try to keep an open mind. All Christians are NOT insane liars, okay?

tom tobias wrote:

I need data, not faith.


What good is data if you disregard it completely?

book review wrote:

http://www.catholiccompany.com/product_detail.cfm?ID=12391

St. John [of the Cross] takes us on a journey into ourselves, a journey of knowledge and self understanding, that encompasses our failings and imperfections. It shows us how in a place beyond words we can embrace sadness and grief, and seeking God, our lives will be turned around. He describes the "arid and dark night of contemplation" which leads us to "the knowledge of oneself and of one's misery." True knowledge of our self and our condition shows how far we must go to find God, who our restless hearts incessantly seek.

The Dark Night of the Soul describes how first the senses, and then the spirit undergo a series of purgation, which aids in bringing it closer to God, and eventually preparing it for union with Him. The individual soul seeks Jesus in a mystical marriage. For after the dark night, comes the joy of mystical union with God.


EDIT: I forgot to mention that one of our local priests has begun e-mailing people homilies (Sunday sermons). If anybody is curious, I'll forward one (or more) to them. You will very definitely see a coherence in the Bible readings (not contradictions).
Post 09 Feb 2007, 20:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
rugxulo wrote:
You definitely do NOT know what you're talking about. Am I really surprised? Anyone who (intentionally or otherwise) says God does not exist is wrong.


Poor ignorant child, being that zero evidence exists for said diety, we must rely on what is creditable for validity of same, namely logic. And it takes elementary logic to prove the impossibility and contradictions of dieties account in the bible or any other text. Many promenent theologans, philosophers and scientists have concluded there is no creditable evidence for any god. Provide evidence for god and you will be doing better than Einstein, Newton, Rochet and Descarte. Children are not born with this awareness of god, it takes many years of indocterination, programming and psychological tramma by breaking their will and personal power through catharsis before this programming takes hold and the victim actually believes what they're being fed. Any child can point out the contradictions and impossibility of the biblical accounts for god, it really isn't that difficult. I hold an offering of 1 billion dollars to the first person who provides a single shred of creditable evidence for the existance of any god. Forget about proof, I'm not concerned with proof, proof is something these faith systems can never provide. Just one tid-bit of creditable evidence will do. Alas, I have offered my billion dollars to several noted church leaders and over a dozen ministers and pastors and none have been able to collect. The sad fact is there is zero evidence for any god, none what so ever. Just as there is no evidence for pixies or mountain trolls.

To quote Michael Martin (sense you like to fall for other people's tesimonty Wink:
Quote:
In one important sense, to say that God is omniscient is to say that God is all knowing. To say that God is all knowing entails that He has all of the knowledge that there is. Now philosophers have usually distinguished three different kinds of knowledge: propositional, procedural and knowledge by acquaintance. Briefly, propositional or factual knowledge is knowledge that something is the case and is analyzable as true belief of a certain kind. In contrast, procedural knowledge or knowledge how is a type of skill and is not reducible to propositional knowledge. Finally, knowledge by acquaintance is direct acquaintance with some object, person or phenomenon. For example, to say "I know Mr. Jones" implies that one has not just detailed propositional knowledge about Mr. Jones but direct acquaintance with Mr. Jones. Similarly, to say "I know poverty" implies that, besides detailed propositional knowledge of poverty, one has some direct experience of it.

To say that God is all knowing, then, is to say that God has all knowledge where this includes propositional, procedural and knowledge by acquaintance. However, theists have not noticed the implications of this account for the existence of God. God's omniscience conflicts with His disembodiness. If God is omniscient, then on this definition God would have all knowledge including that of how to swim. Yet only a being with a body can have such knowledge in the procedural sense, that is actually have the skill, and by definition God does not have a body. Therefore, God's being disembodied and God's being omniscient are in conflict. Thus, if God is both omniscient and disembodied, God does not exist. Since God is both omniscient and disembodied He does not exist.

The property of being all knowing also conflicts with certain moral attributes usually attributed to God. If God is omniscience, He has knowledge by acquaintance of all aspects of lust and envy. But one aspect of lust and envy is the feelings of lust and envy. However, part of the concept of God is that He is morally perfect and being morally perfect excludes these feelings. Consequently, there is a contradiction in the concept of God. God, because He is omniscient, must experience the feeling of lust and envy. But God, because He is morally perfect, is excluded from doing so. Consequently, God does not exist.

In addition, God's omniscience conflicts with His omnipotence. Since God is omnipotent He cannot experience fear, frustration, and despair. For in order to have these experiences one must believe that one is limited in power. But since God is all knowing and all powerful, He knows that He is not limited in power. Consequently, He cannot have complete knowledge by acquaintance of all aspects of fear, frustration and despair. On the other hand, since God is omniscient He must have this knowledge.
Of course, one can imagine various objections to these three arguments. However, these objections can be met and an extended refutation of them can be found in my book.[18] Perhaps the most commonly voiced criticism should be mentioned here. One might object that God's knowledge should not include knowledge by acquaintance and all knowledge how since it is not logically possible for God to have all knowledge by acquaintance and all knowledge how. Thus, God's knowledge should be limited to factual knowledge. The trouble with this reply, however, is that it committed to the view that it is logically impossible for God to have knowledge that it is logically possible for humans to have. The result is paradoxical to say the least.

One normally supposes that the following is true:

(1) If person P is omniscient, then P has knowledge that any nonomniscient being has.

Furthermore, one normally supposes that the following is true:

(2) If God exists, God has all knowledge that humans have.

But both (1) and (2) are false given the restriction of God's knowledge to factual knowledge.

However, even if we restrict God's knowledge to propositional knowledge, the concept of God is still incoherent.

I only have space here to consider one argument that can be adduced to show that it is logically impossible for God to be omniscient in this sense.[19]

Consider a neglected argument of Roland Puccetti[20] that I reconstruct as follows:

If P is omniscient, then P would have knowledge of all facts about the world. Let us call this totality of facts Y. So if P is omniscient, then P knows Y. One of the facts included in Y is that P is omniscient. But in order to know that P is omniscience P would have to know something besides Y. P would have to know:

(Z) There are no facts unknown to P

But how can Z be known? Puccetti argues that Z cannot be known since Z is an unrestricted negative existential statement. He admits that it is possible to know the truth about those negative existential statements that are restricted temporally and spatially. But Z is a negative existential that is completely uncircumscribed. Knowing Z, Puccetti says, would be like knowing it is true that no centaurs exist anywhere at any time.

But why could not God with his infinite power search all of space and time and conclude that there are no centaurs? Similarly, why could not God search all space and time and conclude that there is no more factual knowledge that He can acquire? Puccetti is not as clear as he might be but one can assume that he would answer this question by saying that God could not exhaustively search space and time because they are both infinite. No matter how long God searched there would be more space and time to search. Consequently, it is possible that there are facts He does not know. Thus, for God to know that He knows all the facts located in space and time is impossible, and since omniscience entails such knowledge, omniscience is impossible.
Post 09 Feb 2007, 23:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Quote:

by definition God does not have a body. Therefore, God's being disembodied and God's being omniscient are in conflict. Thus, if God is both omniscient and disembodied, God does not exist. Since God is both omniscient and disembodied He does not exist


Jesus is God, and Jesus has a body. He lived 33 years on Earth, was crucified, and raised from the dead. He even (also) had a human soul (believe it or not). He was a normal human in every way except He did not sin and only came for one purpose: our salvation.

Quote:

The property of being all knowing also conflicts with certain moral attributes usually attributed to God. If God is omniscience, He has knowledge by acquaintance of all aspects of lust and envy. But one aspect of lust and envy is the feelings of lust and envy. However, part of the concept of God is that He is morally perfect and being morally perfect excludes these feelings. Consequently, there is a contradiction in the concept of God. God, because He is omniscient, must experience the feeling of lust and envy. But God, because He is morally perfect, is excluded from doing so. Consequently, God does not exist.


A rock doesn't have these "feelings" either, so therefore a rock does not exist. A cat has neither a soul or a conscience, and therefore cannot lust. (BTW, lust is not an accidental thing.) Therefore, a cat must not exist.

Part of the definition of God is that He is perfect, He created everything good, and He is all-powerful, all-knowing, etc. If He is all-knowing, He surely knows what He is not, and He is not sinful. "Sin" is defined as rejection of God, rebellion against Him. Even if He weren't all-knowing (which He is), He surely has learned by now what sin looks like, etc. If He didn't understand it, how could He forgive it?? (But you deny that too.)

This refutal is just plain useless arguing by people who have not been even slightly educated in Judeo-Christian theology. (No real "theologist" can deny God. How can you be an "expert" in something you don't acknowledge? If you've never "met" God, how can you define Him or even theoretically "what He'd be like if He did exist"?)

I wonder what it is that such people think they gain by denying or redefining God. More freedom? (God gave us full freedom.) More power? (How much power can a single, simple human have?) More pride? (What good is that? It's the greatest kind of sin, so avoid it like the plague.)

(God, help us cut through the lies! Guide us in truth so we avoid every kind of evil.)

tantrikwizard, you will never be convinced (although that was not my intention). Hopefully, everyone else is not quite so ridiculously skeptical.

I guess I've continued this thread long enough. ^Z ^D ... EOF
Post 10 Feb 2007, 05:05
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Maverick



Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 251
Location: Citizen of the Universe
Maverick
rugxulo wrote:
Jesus is God, and Jesus has a body. He lived 33 years on Earth

Then when was the exact date of birth of God (meant as Jesus)? It's not a silly question, if it seems to you. Answer please. The exact date of birth of Jesus, the one you really believe in (he was such an important person that it must be known, not?! we ain't talking about my granny, but about THE SON OF GOD!!).
Give the date of birth, please.

_________________
Greets,
Fabio
Post 10 Feb 2007, 07:38
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 12, 13, 14  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.