Why Should Jesus Love Me?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486207 Feb 9, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
the reason I would expect you not to blame everybody is because everybody isn't guilty
Of what?
Skombolis wrote:
Even ignoring the broad-brush such as Christians lacking empathy or being delusional as far as how they think how can you ...
Stifle, Dingbat.

You've already been shown to be a liar for making these bare, unsupported claims. I've rebutted them both by showing you what I actually said, and you are indifferent. Fine.

I call you a liar for repeating them knowing that you are wrong.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486208 Feb 9, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
@ Ian... by God I mean = Jehovah (ehyeh asher ehyeh)/Jesus
OK, thanks. I had assumed that.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#486209 Feb 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't think that you were trying to start an argument. I just disagreed with the use of the word "fundie" in the context of atheists. The word is derogatory now, like the word "religon" itself, which is why so many believers are distancing themselves form both words and trying to saddle the opposition - us - with them.
<quoted text>
The term has very negative connotations, something that the church has always saddled unbelievers with. Describing those who object as I do using the word "militant" undermines our message the way the words "extreme" and "radical" do. They depict us as unreasonable or dangerous.
This process, by the way, has come to be known as "framing" - choosing the words that are used to describe oneself favorably and the opposition unfavorably.
<quoted text>
I agree. Let's leave the violence to others.
https://images.nonexiste.net/popular/wp-conte...
Thanks.

I admit I use the word "Fundie" as an insult yet have no problem with Fundamentalism aside from the acadmic arguements.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#486210 Feb 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
Perfect gods that make mistakes are impossible in the same way that married bachelors are. You got a book allegedly authored by a perfect god in which it describes itself. The god described is grotesque, and the book used to describe it is rife with errors. In that sense, the bible is self-refuting - it makes claims and then refutes them in neighboring passages.
This tells us that the book is not authentic,that is, its origin is not the one claimed for it. It was not written by the perfect god that it claims exists and is overseeing life on earth with perfect power,perfect knowledge, and perfect love. Several of your fellow Christians will be happy to tell you how far reality varies from that.
If the book was not written by a god, then it is mythology written by men, the god it describes is fictional, the religion derived from it false, and the church administering and profiting from all of it fraudulent. I do not see how any other conclusion is possible.
I do not blame the texts, the Bible says the only thing YHWY wrote was on a couple tablets and Jesus wrote something in the sand once.
Nowhere does it claim to be written by God nor the exact and complete words of God.

I blame people who read into it what they want to see.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486211 Feb 9, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
What is so difficult for you to understand that the church is made up of members and those members are individuals and you have to judge individuals based on their individual actions.
What is impossible for you to understand is what your church is, and why it is responsible, not the rank and file Christian, who is generally an unwitting vector and victim of his church himself.
Skombolis wrote:
The church itself has no bigoted policies.
Policies? Your church has a bigoted message.
Skombolis wrote:
It takes a position on one form of behavior you disagree with
What are you talking about? Your church embodies multiple forms of bigotry.
Skombolis wrote:
... and teaches all sin is equal and all people are deserving of love.
Tell that to small children and skid row alcoholics. They might believe you. Your church teaches no such thing. Giving lip service to love is not teaching it. The church teaches by example, and the example is hateful.
Skombolis wrote:
Because some people don't adhere to that teaching is not the fault of anybody other than the people who don't adhere to it
Wrong.

Your church has failed in its role.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486212 Feb 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
There are other arguments that do use the results of science, such as the argument that science rules out the Genesis creation story,
Qu_innocence wrote:
How so?
Read the Big Bang theory, plate tectonic theory,and evolutionary theory. The read Genesis. You'll find a few discrepancies. Such errors rule out divine authorship for the myth. If your bible isn't reliable, you don't have any basis for claiming that any god that might exist is Jehovah-Jesus rather than Vishnu or Allah.
Qu_innocence wrote:
So everything points back to the Genesis/Science account?
No. That is one argument. We can do the same with Exodus. Archeology refutes many of the principle claims there, too. It appears that there was no Egyptian captivity or exodus. These are the signs that the legends are mythology.

And there are many other types of arguments.

In any event, the bible account isn't credible without faith.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486213 Feb 9, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
I haven't seen anything that would logically deduce that Jehovah/Jesus does not exist.
You likely never will. It's called confirmation bias.

Ask yourself this: if your faith were wrong, what would suffice as sufficient evidence to demonstrate that to you? Is the answer, "nothing could"?

Are you familiar with William Lane Craig? He said it nicely:

"...And my view here is, that the way in which I know Christianity is true is first and foremost on the basis of the witness of the Holy Spirit. In my heart. And that this gives me a self-authenticating means of knowing that Christianity is true wholly apart from the evidence. And therefore, if in some historically contingent circumstances, the evidence that I have available to me should turn against Christianity, I don't think that that contraverts the witness of the Holy Spirit. In such a situation, I should regard that as simply a result of the contingent circumstances that I'm in, and that if I were to pursue this with due diligence and with time, I would discover that the evidence, if in fact I could get the correct picture, would support exactly what the witness of the Holy Spirit tells me. So I think that's very important to get the relationship between faith and reason right..."

What that means is that no such evidence would be acceptable to this man. He said that "the evidence that I have available to me should turn against Christianity," that he would ignore it.

What should I say to somebody like that who says "I haven't seen anything that would [allow me to] logically deduce that Jehovah-Jesus does not exist" apart from "You likely never will"?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486214 Feb 9, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
You can call me "dim" all you like
Thanks, Dim.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#486215 Feb 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
What is impossible for you to understand is what your church is, and why it is responsible, not the rank and file Christian, who is generally an unwitting vector and victim of his church himself.
<quoted text>
Policies? Your church has a bigoted message.
<quoted text>
What are you talking about? Your church embodies multiple forms of bigotry.
<quoted text>
Tell that to small children and skid row alcoholics. They might believe you. Your church teaches no such thing. Giving lip service to love is not teaching it. The church teaches by example, and the example is hateful.
<quoted text>
Wrong.
Your church has failed in its role.
I hate too admit it but most organizations to benefit the masses end up being little more than beaurocratic mouth pieces and do little to further the goals of the orignal movement.

It seems the larger the organization's memberbases, the less it accomplishes.

WOW! I bet there is a doctoral thesis there.
"The economies of scale in theological and social organizations."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486216 Feb 9, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
Do you want to see some of your lies again?
Skombolis wrote:
You also said you don't rule out the possibility of a creator god (but would require proof)
IANS responded
Nope. I'm not going to continue to correct you any more.
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE...
I then went back and posted where you claimed you believe it is possible creator gods exist, just like you admitted you believed in here already.
Where's the lie, Dim?

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#486217 Feb 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Read the Big Bang theory, plate tectonic theory,and evolutionary theory. The read Genesis. You'll find a few discrepancies. Such errors rule out divine authorship for the myth. If your bible isn't reliable, you don't have any basis for claiming that any god that might exist is Jehovah-Jesus rather than Vishnu or Allah.
<quoted text>
No. That is one argument. We can do the same with Exodus. Archeology refutes many of the principle claims there, too. It appears that there was no Egyptian captivity or exodus. These are the signs that the legends are mythology.
And there are many other types of arguments.
In any event, the bible account isn't credible without faith.
I am of the opinion that as an ancient effort to explain the beginings of the Universe and Life, the Hebrew rendition of the Sumerian tales does make a lot of decent, abeit simplistic and incomplete, speculative theories.

That said, it is more of a Children's Book of History. I do not find the 'Big Bang', evolution nor the spontaneous emergence of life to be contradictory with the Genesis account. As for Exodus, well that is obviously a political document and has little to do with history, again much like a grade school history book in USA schools.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486218 Feb 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Then what objection could you possibly have to somebody believing anything else by faith? If a person were to say that he rejects Christianity on faith, his argument would be as good as yours.
Qu_innocence wrote:
That's what I've been saying all along... people still have faith no matter what. If Christianity is considered a philosophy by some, then so is Atheism and Agnosticism... they are also belief systems. It is just that they choose to put their faith in something else. Atheists aren't able to prove that God does not exist. Without absolute proofs, it takes a measure of faith to believe that God (The Creator) does not exist. But we don't think along those lines because it's secular mainstream. If worth+ship (worship) has valute then is it possible that evolutionists worship the creation rather than the Creator since they believe that the universe is "self-creating".
I don't think that you are saying what I am. I didn't say that I have faith. I asked you on what basis you could contradict somebody who had faith in the opposite position.

And rational skeptics don't worship. Don't you cheapen the quality of your own worship by conflating it with what an unbeliever does? I don't worship the universe or any element of it.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486219 Feb 9, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. if you attend The Little Church On The Prairie, that's great! Along with fellowship, sometimes these small churches are a great benefit to the community they serve. That's their very purpose ..

.. my gripes are directed towards large, influential sects who:
1. Influence government to conform to the Christian worldview.
2. Spend obscene amounts of money to influence voters.
3. Encourage members to campaign for certain politicians.
4. Promote patriarchy disguised as family values.
5. Insist abortion must be eliminated regardless of circumstances.
6. Build mega-churches and sell DVDs/Books/CD's/Etc. under the non-profit umbrella.
7. Proselytize in poor Third World Countries.
8. Influence foreign governments to pass laws against homosexuality, abortion, witchcraft or anything they consider sinful.
.. your thoughts ??..
Nice.

That's the difference between private religion and public religion. The first is not the issue, and is really nobody's business but the believers' own. The latter is everybody's business.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486220 Feb 9, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
Is this what you have been referring to as lying or changing position for all these months? Why did it take you three months to produce it?

You misunderstood me, or I you. I have never considered your god a possibility since long before I began posting on Topix, which is easily demonstrable. Here is a search of the number of times that I have posted that, "your bible is self-refuting" - 909 hits, many long before November 2012 http://snipurl.com/26cnl08

Here's one from Jan 2011:
http://www.topix.com/forum/world/canada/T4JIH...

This is why I call you an idiot,or moron, or whatever I call you. You have been milking some misunderstanding for three months now, calling me a liar all along, and have just now produced what it is that you were referring to. Had you produced your evidence immediately, we could have settled this long ago.

How could you possibly have any doubt about my position on your god? How many times do I have to tell you that your god is ruled out by its bible? I have never believed or meant otherwise ever in my time on Topix.

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#486221 Feb 9, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
That is what most don't understand.
It seems that many on both sides of the issue have a "black and white" world view.
What is private religion? The matter between GOD and an individual?

If one doesn't want to hear about religion, why would one be on a forum debating that subject? Is that public atheism?

Then in that case, I have nothing against private atheism......

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#486222 Feb 9, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah, I saw the gays were having some type of "kiss me" day in front of one of the Chick Fillets to protest. Was that you in the leopard leotard and tube socks? lol...
There is so much affected behavior by certain individuals in certain groups.... I could almost hear the words of G's posting, and I knew exactly the affected behavior he would have adopted as he was rubbing it in. I see it all the time these days :)

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#486223 Feb 9, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You remind me of bigots who "politely" disagreed that black people should be able to sit in the front of a bus, or eat at restaurants with whites, or stay at hotels for whites, or go to schools with whites.
I tell YOU what: bigotry is bigotry, even genteel bigotry or biblically-based bigotry.
We need more national uproars.
Do you think there should be no limits displaying one's sexuality or sexual preferences? No boundaries as such. Could modesty on both sides of the fence, and those who sit on the fence liking a bit of both ways, all act with modest behavior or is that bigotry?

I don't want to get into this debate really, because we have been there and done that many times in this forum and there is no winner, nor in reality a grinner, but wonder where bigotry starts and where modesty stops.

Dictionary; Modest describes someone or something that is humble or shy or not extreme....

However, I am seeking to be humble, it is a part of my Spiritual Journey, so perhaps I am bigoted to humility?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486224 Feb 9, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
I remember recently how one of the leaders with Chick Fillet politely disagreed with Gay marriage sentiments and the like. He wasn't rude about it but still it caused a national uproar. I tell you what... my wife and I were some of the Christians who joined with millions of other pro-traditional marriage advocates which came out to show support for Chick Fillet.
Rudeness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. If many people were offended, the comment was by definition offensive.

This is a recurring theme - Christians saying that their doctrine is loving, and much of the world disagreeing. That is also for others to decide. I find nothing loving about Christian atheophobia or homophobia, for example. Besides making the lives of millions of people a little more difficult and a little more dangerous, it's rude.

The church has always benefited from scapegoating like this because it has held majority status. Christians still outnumber unbelievers, and so polarizing wedge issues like these are still profitable, even if all the unbelievers boycott the offender. The Christian majority does what you did.

This is why the numbers game is important. I expect that in twenty years, when the numbers have flipped and unbelievers have majority status, that stunts like these will end up costing money, and they will come to an end.

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#486225 Feb 10, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
<quoted text>If I'm a bigot, sobeit... The catch phrase doesn't phase me, it's one of those silly psychological guilt traps that people try to put on others who don't agree with the perversion of sin. But if I'm a bigot then the bible is bigoted concerning the sin of homosexuality.
Look, I'm a black, I'm spanish... at least that is what the demographics say what I'm suppose to be... a black latino, spanish negro, black hispanic. And I can tell you that the gay movement piggybacking on civil rights is a personal offense to me and to many other blacks. Now to other black leaders, they see it differently... they are not my leaders.
Sexual sin, whether it is hetero or homo is sexual sin.
I understand...

My DNA and ancestry is different; being a red head with very fair skin, blue eyes and freckles tells its' own story, but the story within has far greater meaning.

Soon, I will be undergoing the DNA Ancestry test, and will be waiting with excitement to find out more about my true inheritance, and have the utmost FAITH that they will not be linking me to a monkey, or an ape of some kind :)

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#486226 Feb 10, 2013
NoStress4me wrote:
Full comment found here, no disrespect intended:
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR...
<quoted text>
I don’t think that they have. The discussion the two of you are having, seems to be suffering from a bit of a miscommunication in my opinion. Just because one may concede that the God we Christians believe in might possibly be, does not mean that they concede our own personal view of what God is.
Thanks for that.

You are correct. My position has never wavered on this matter about Skombolis' god.

He has been accusing me of the opposite for months based on that post, which he has never linked to before now. I have told him countless times that he needs to do that when he makes a claim so that I can explain or defend my comments.

He has chosen instead to simply call me a liar based on what he thinks I meant, despite my continual criticism and repeat demonstrations of his deficient reading comprehension and tendency to deform ideas in their retelling.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min WildWeirdWillie 52,119
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 9 min another viewer 992,000
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Phooey 693,268
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 1 hr waaasssuuup 445,992
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 2 hr Edthirty 286,690
Allah is Satan hiding behind the name 2 hr Holy dr Shrink 21
‘Trump’s a racist’ — Marcia, Marcia, Ma... 5 hr Dipsy doodle 3
More from around the web