Going out of the country.
That's why I'm not talking to anyone, in case you're wondering.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Thursday, October 20, 2011
A potpourri on homosexuality
Me
Clever, though hetero cousins still anatomically fit together.
JT
So do gay men... They just have to flip each other around. So if we go by what fits gay women are out but gay men are in? Rhology you have turned a new leaf of acceptance!
Me
Ah, the disconnect here is that you apparently think that delicate membranes, easily torn, thus introducing fecal matter into the bloodstream = "anatomically fit". That's an interesting opinion.
Cason
Use a condom
Me
Ah, right, b/c that'll fix the tissue tearing. Great idea.
Better one - stick with God's design.
Cason
**rools eyes** God designed me too.....
Cason
Here is something for you to go do in your spare time Rhology (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/westboro-announces-protest-steve-jobs-funeral-iphone-141530936.html)
Me
Do you really think that anyone who believes that God designed us to be heterosexual is automatically equivalent to Westboro? Do you know that Westboro picketed my church?
Do you realise how offensive your ignorant comparison is?
Me
And yes, God designed you. If you're saying "God made me gay", you're leaving out a really big part of what the Bible teaches, and that is that we all break God's law.
You have just now broken God's law by comparing someone you don't know to a group of extremely hateful people, just b/c I said something you don't like. What do you think you'll have to say to God when you stand before Him on your day of judgment? Have you ever considered that?
Cason
I'll pray for you. God Bless
Me
Cason, please believe that I harbor zero hatred for you but rather compassion and love. But you have to be told the truth.
"He who turns away his ear from listening to the law, Even his prayer is an abomination." - Proverbs 28:9
JT
Rhology and how will you explain yourself, may take a while. Rhology, how can you misconsture my trachings so bad he will ask... What will your answer be? Anyways back to the tearing issue. Women tear also Rhology. It happens.
BF
Sometimes people are unaware of how they come across to others. It happens. Perhaps you failed to realize that your words come out more like Westboro and less like Jesus. Just a thought.
Me
I'd take such criticisms more seriously if they demonstrated any recognition of the vast difference between how I speak and how Westboro speaks. You guys just sound like bigots, I'm sorry.
BF
Case in point.
Me
Indeed it is. Maybe you could point out precisely where I sound like WBC, and point out where WBC speaks in the same way. Make sure you're making selections that are relevant.
Does WBC ask questions like I did?
JT
Its not what you say, Its the fact that everyone is wrong and you are right and you then talk down to people. Rhology, its scary you cant see that. Plus back to the original debate.. Women tear during sex so your point is irrelevant
BF
I didn't say you sound like them. I said you are received like them, primarily for the reason JT stated. It's the belittling of others' opinions that gets to people. It's putting your opinion out there, with a provocative edge (perhaps to get people's attention) that matches their style. I'm not saying that Christians should never be provocative. I'm not saying that Christians should never point out the wrongs of others. I'm mostly wondering how it's working out for you. Are you reaching a lot of homosexuals? Have you seen a lot of conversions with your approach? Does what you are offering to others sound as gracious as it really is? Of course grace is not extended without justice, judgment or sacrifice on our part but are you effectively presenting the full package or just the judgment part?
Me
I suppose that you don't think you're right and I'm wrong? Come on, JT.
And women tear rarely, whereas the anal tissue is much more fragile AND ALWAYS IS NEAR FECAL MATTER.
Me
So you think I'm wrong but you're not belittling my opinion? You exhibit a double standard, probably for the simple fact that you don't like what I say. It's not that I say it badly or with hate, but you don't like it so you rip me. You can have that hypocrisy.
BTW, who posted this photo? Is this my photo?
You know nothing about my approach, BF. You don't talk to me about this, but you apparently feel qualified to judge me? OK.
Me
Anyway, as for "reaching" them, you can either feed them a line of lies and they'll be happy (until they go to Hell) or you can tell the truth. YOu can't demonstrate that I trade in hate, so I don't know what you're mad about.
Me
Finally, the proud and the unrepentant willl not listen to grace; they need to be convicted of sin first.
BF
You and I can agree 100% on your last statement. I feel that it's best to rest on that. Hopefully I will be stripped of my pride before have to answer for it. I can only hope for the same or better for others.
Me
It's our job to bring blessing to others by showing them their guilt before the Law of God before we extend to them the unspeakably amazing grace of Jesus.
JT
What does fecal matter have to do with it. What about Urine. And does the tearing only occue less because of the freequencey and the body coping witht he situation. Much like a man on man. So all of my gay friends are going to hell? Because they cant choose who they like or are attracted to? Sounds like a design issue, might want to talk to the big guy on that one. God made us all in his image. So what does that say about God? Rhology when is the last time you ever thought you were wrong and maybe someone else was right. Oh wait you interpert the bible how you interpert it. Its not fact but interpertation after interpuertation!
Cason
Any sins you care to confess Rhology?
Cason
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." (John 8:7 NIV)
Me
JT,
The anus is for elimination of waste, not for sexual contact. That's what it was designed for.
I already told you what fecal matter has to do with it. Are you paying attention or just arguing b/c you have emotional reactions to what the Bible says?
Tell you what, about your question "are all of my gay friends going to hell?" We've talked about these things numerous times. I don't care to repeat myself so many times, so let me ask you: what do you think I'll say in response to this question? Please surprise me by letting me know you actually do pay attention instead of just rail against God's law.
Let's say Jimmy were to come along and ask, "Hmm, what does JT's last comment mean?"
And Chris said, "It means he is eating tortillas and guacamole."
JT might later object and say "No, I was discussing homosexuality."
But that = "your specific interpretation of your comment". There are many, many readers who don't share your specific interpretation of your comment, and there is precisely no reason why I should accept your interpretation over theirs.
Your only defense at this point is to claim that they are wrong, and you are right, because your understanding of your comment is accurate and theirs is not. Unfortunately that isn't actually a reason to accept your interpretation over theirs; it's just your opinion.
Me
Cason, yes, I am a great sinner. I am a lustful and thus adulterous man. I covet things that aren't mine. I lie to my own advantage. I steal from others. I have been unjustifiably angry and thus am a murderer at heart. I am an idolater because I put things before God Almighty. I fail to honor my parents as I should, so I am a parricide.
Jesus has saved me because He is my only hope.
What are you trusting in? Are you better than I? Jesus said "Be perfect as My Father is perfect." Are you perfect? WHat will you tell God when you stand before Him to be judged?
Cason
So, help me understand..... Do all sinners go to hell or just gay ones
Me
All. Jesus is the only hope for anyone.
Cason
None of us are without sin..... At least that's what I believe. If all this world has to do is worry about what Jim and Joe are doing in the bedroom then God help us all.
JT
So fluids and urine in the bloodstream is ok but not fecal matter... Check! Ok so what if I cut myself and dirt gets in the blood stream. Is your only argument that fecal matter gets in the blodd stream? I bet a lof things get in the blood stream. My reaction is to how ridiclious some people are. How judging people who love everyone are. How a loving God is sending so many people to hell. Doenst sound very loving. You seem to be a homophob who thinks he is the end all be all when it comes to what God and Jesus want. Kinda Scary...
JF
This is a disgusting post... not because of homosexuality, but because of the intolerance thereof.
Cason
So Anyone include "Rhology".....right?
JT
Cason, its just the gay ones, your room is in the back witht he disco ball and the village people.
JF
BF -- I'm disappointed in your early dismissal!
Me
This is a disgusting post... not because of intolerance of homosexuality, but because of the intolerance of intolerance.
Me
Cason, I believe I just explained what I meant. Are you reading or just trying to play a game?
JF
oh... well touche Rhology. ha.
Cason
Shiny disco balls!
JT
Intolerance becasue we dont drop eveything and follow Rhology. You are one year away from having people drink Kool-Aid as the commet passes over... Seriously your not but your reaction to everyone else says that. No one is right but you
Me
So, you can be intolerant but I can't. OK. Double standard again.
Me
JT, that is false. You should be ashamed of yourself to talk that way.
JT
Rhology, Do you think they choose to be or are they born that way
Me
That question is unimportant and uninteresting. We are all sinners and we must all repent and belong to Jesus.
JF
That question is unimportant and uninteresting.... to you.
JT
I apologize Rhology, point is you act like you know it all and we are all wrong. You have never thought about what we say you just spew off what you heard in Church or read in a book..... Oh it is very important;
Me
Why is it important?
JT
Answer and you will see why
Me
Read in "a" book? Is it just "a book", JT?
JT
Well I want talking about just the Bible but yes it is just a book...Just like words are just words...
JT
So Rhology answer my question please
Cason
I was born this way...... I also have brown skin and brown eyes.... Nothing that I can change. I have a relationship with my God whom I call Jesus Christ. I have learned from my understanding that he loves all with an unimaginable measurement of love but hates all sin. "Love the sinner not the sin"
JT
Rhology wont answer becasue if he does he knows the outcome.
Cason
This is the written account of Adam's family line.
When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. (Genesis 5:1 NIV)
Me
Cason,
What happened in between then and now? Specifically, Genesis 3.
Why did Jesus come to Earth?
ANd how do you know what you think you know about Jesus?
Me
JT, if the BIble is just a book, how do know what you think you know about God and about humankind?
JT
Rhology, Anser my question please. The bible is just a book. It does nothing. Its the words... The longest game of telephone ever...
Me
JT, if the BIble is just a book, how do know what you think you know about God and about humankind?
JT
So wait if it wasnt for the bible we wouldnt know anything about God and humankind. So before the bible what did they do
Cason
It was breathed into me at the moment of my conception Along with my brown hair, skin, Gay ways. My life story along with my trials, tribulations, and the Facebook thread were already known from beginning to end. Jesus was sent to die for all sins up to and include homosexuality, murder, lieing, stealing, lustfull thoughts. His blood was shed for the sins of the world that include Cason, Rhology, JT, Neal, or Bob. I don't question your strong faith or your relationship with God. I do question why you think I am condemned to hell for my sins but you are not.
Cason
What makes your Church and it's members any better than Westbrook, me, my church, or my beliefs?
Cason
What makes you better than me?
Cason
"If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. (Matthew 18:6 NIV) ***Please don't cause me to stumble because I am a child of God.
BF
JF, I threw the towel in because Rhology is not going to stop just because I make valid points. He seems to be committed to a Crusade style of evangelism. It's unfortunate that people choose that style. It embarrasses me to be a Christian.
JF
BF, I agree. 100%.
Me
Cason, yes, Jesus died for sins. What did He say about how someone can benefit from that death?
And I have never said, nor implied, that I am better than you.
My church follows what the bible says. If yours does not, it does make my church better than yours, but that is by God's grace and not because of the people in it.
JF and BF, I am glad you enjoy your mutual back-patting. Maybe you could consider how different from Jesus and the apostles you are.
Me
Cason, you said Jesus died for sin. How do you know what sin is? How do you think Jesus knew what sin was? How did he define it?
Me
Finally, Cason, do you hate sin? Is homosexual sex a sin?
JT
LOL Rhology why wont you answer my question? You know you will be backed in a corner. You follow your interpertation of the bible. You dont follow the bible. Jesus still loves you though. Homosexual sex is love between two people. Is all straight sex a sin? Once again we are back to who are you to judge, why cant you let people love each other the way they want to? I wish I could watch your life everyday and critize you as you critize and cast stones. Are you a homophobic? Or maybe you have feelings that scare you.
Me
Told you why, JT. Why won't you answer mine?
JT
Rhology I clearly asked you first... You ignore questions and ask questions... So are they born that way or is it a choice?
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
A convo on abortion and general Christian ethics
Mac
If I performed breast exams to screen for cancer for free, and I also murdered small children, would you support me with your donations? Susan G. Komen would.
Mac
http://ww5.komen.org/Content.aspx?id=16162
Me
https://twitter.com/#!/Rhology/status/121325207481876480 @LarryFitzgerald FYI Susan Komen funds Planned Parenthood. :-( http://t.co/JH6l9Xfl
Mac
http://liveaction.org/blog/planned-parenthood-ceos-false-mammogram-claim-exposed/
Mac
I guess I should.change the quote to "if I claimed to provide breast exams..."
BC
perspective. As long as it is kept quiet the part about you murdering babies, the public will choose to overlook it. That and as long as you claim that the exams are the central part of what you do and that killing babies is just a small percentage of what you do (kind of like a side business)
Danz
With this line of thinking I fear one would have to make a very tough decision. You guys are going to go crazy, move up into the mountains in isolation if you do not want to contribute to evil. Actually even if you did isolate yourself you would still be in some way contributing to evil. Don't you guys pay taxes to the US government? If yes, you are contributing to all their evils. Every time you spend a dollar, part of your taxes go to doing evil. (for a good cause of course.) You support the tobacco industry everytime you support those who sell tobacco, which is every gas station in America. SO what do you do? Stop buying gas? And don't even think about the gas and it's evils. Maybe we should stop using gas. My point is this: Either way you will be supporting that guy killing babies, as long as he does breast exams. For stopping the breast exams would be evil in another way. It's like hitting your head on a wall, which I've almost tried a few times.
Mac
except for the fact.that from what I have.read, planned parenthood just pretended to do mammograms, and there are other places to go and get them that dont murder children.
Me
Correct. We can't avoid indirectly contributing to evil, can't avoid paying taxes. We are in fact commanded to pay taxes, and that to an evil government, at least twice in the New Testament!
We are also encouraged to be wise and not participate in evil when we don't have to. Nobody has to give money to Susan Komen. If you want to help women and cancer, give money to someone who is not into dismembering babies.
Danz
So Rhology, the Bible says you must pay your taxes. So would you say the American Revolution That was based on the refusal to pay taxes to England, a bad thing and violation against God's law? So basically the American Independence is forged in disobedience to the Bible. Would you agree to that? Furthermore, if you don't support Susan Komen, you'll just be supporting someone who supports other evils by shopping at Walmart or buying from McDonalds, two of the biggest exploitative capitalist corporations in the world. Surly these evils are as valuable. My point is, there is no way around it unless you make a TRUE commitment to be a weirdo. Last thing about the taxes and government thing, if you were German during the killing of the jews, would you disassociate yourself with the German government or follow the Bible rule to submit yourself to authority for HE is the one who establishes all authorities. (a mind twister in itself since many authorities are established through revolution and in direct violation to that rule.) Anyways, it's either we agree that the Bible standards are too high for us, or we agree that we are falling way under par to the expectations of Christ.
Me
Hi Dan!
I think the justifiability of the AmRev is an open question. So yes, it's definitely possible that American independence is forged in disobedience. I'm not sure what the relevance is, though.
Yes, WalMart does bad things, but pretty much any grocer does, and I have to buy groceries.
Besides, you don't solve this question by what's known as a "tu quoque" - saying "you do bad stuff too!"
You solve it by saying "OK, I'll stop doing the bad thing you've identified insofar as it lies within my ability."
So, to be reasonable, you need to NOT say the former. You need to say the latter.
No, I would not support an evil gov't that was murdering Jews. There are most certainly grades of evil, and not accepting mass murder is more important than not accepting submission to the gov't.
I agree that we are falling way under par to the expectations of Christ. Two things:
1) That does not mean that we have the right to ignore His expectations.
2) Since you have fallen short, what is the answer? Are you not guilty? Does Jesus ignore guilt?
(I'm not disclaiming guilt. I'm asking what YOUR answer is.)
Danz
Hi Rhology, my answer would be to be real with ourselves and honest with each other. No hypocrisy. I agree however, that the solution it to stop doing bad. But we need to understand that this will require extreme measures.
Why? Because the level of evil has reach an extreme measure. You say you have to buy groceries. No you don't. You can grow your own food. Yes, your diet would be much different but there are other ways. I have a friend in Denver who gets all his food from dumpsters. Near expired canned food mostly. And on my last visit he fed me dumpster food because the thinks it's stupid to pay for food when so much is wasting. That is an extreme measure based on a belief.
Yes, we fall short, but are we even trying to reach a certain point. You don't HAVE to wear exploitation clothing. But it is easy to do so. Again you can find clothes that are not based on exploitation or you can make your own also. But then you would have to sacrifice name brands. Are you willing to do this to get closer to the standard of Christ?
Last think, the relevance of the AmRev is that it seems you are willing to justify Biblical disobedience in certain cases. For example, it is less bad to not accept submission to govt. (even though this is a direct order from God), than to support the govt in killing Jews. But then if your government was killing Arabs on the other side of the globe, it might not be so bad. Since surely those Arabs are in disobedience, we like to say.
I feel like I'm going in circles. If you believe the AmRev was done against GOD's will, would you say it shouldn't have been done? That it was wrong for happening and did not have GOD's blessing? And as the Bible teaches we must repent for our sins and even work to repay our debts. I think you see where I'm going? Do you believe in reparations for victims of a crime of some sort, or punishment for the aggressors? do you think the American Government should have to pay for it's crimes or get a free pass. And should the victims receive anything for their pain?
All these questions play into the honesty and fairness that the Bible teaches. If you are truly advocating for Christ and his teachings you will obviously be encouraging things that for sure are not in the general interest of the American people. But those are the extreme measures I am talking about.
Me
Tell you what, we can debate about the merits of buying groceries from big companies later.
I would hope we could at least agree that we shouldn't give money to an org that intentionally gives money to dismembering babies. It's not that hard, and it's not very complext either.
As for clothing, all of mine is either inherited from my brothers or is bought at the thrift store. I can guarantee I'm not contributing to "exploitation". I also lack the skills to sew and weave.
Be that as it may, I didn't see you answer my big questions there at the end. I would really like to ask you to answer them. They're extremely important.
--"if your government was killing Arabs on the other side of the globe, it might not be so bad"
What did I say that gave you the impression that I support the US' involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan? And Libya? And Uganda? And Pakistan? And on and on...
--"If you believe the AmRev was done against GOD's will, would you say it shouldn't have been done?"
When I said I think the justifiability of the AmRev is an open question, I meant precisely what I said.
--"That it was wrong for happening and did not have GOD's blessing?"
That's far too simplistic. Not everyone does things for the same reasons, and several 100s of 1000s of ppl were involved in the AmRev.
--"do you think the American Government should have to pay for it's crimes or get a free pass."
I'm unsure how a government would pay for crimes.
--"If you are truly advocating for Christ and his teachings you will obviously be encouraging things that for sure are not in the general interest of the American people."
Obeying God is always in the best interest of people. You sort of got confused there at the end, bringing up a variety of things that are not very relevant. Could you please answer my main two challenges from last comment?
Mac
Danz, how much dumpster food would be available if everybody ate it? How much time would one have to grow all their food, work full time, raise a family etc. Should I quit my job and ignore my family in order to grow all my own food? Where would I grow it after my house was foreclosed upon?
Danz
Ok the two main questions:
1. Are you not guilty? and 2. Does Jesus ignore guilt?
1. when you say YOU do you mean ME personally or us in general? If me, Yes. if in general, HELL YEAH! As far as the Bible standards we are all guilty. 2. Jesus does not ignore guilt. But I am hoping that he is understanding.
Yes, i think it is best to not give money to an organization that is doing wrong.
The skills to sew and weave can be taught, learned and improved a pond.
I assume you support US wars because your taxes finances it. And I do know if you are in a movement to end the wars.
Open ended questions need addressed.
100 or 1000s of people were involved in the AmRev just like millions are involved in abortions or the slave trade. Everyone has their reasons but bottom line is that it is wrong or it is right. Not to mention the killings.
Governments can pay for their crimes through reparations to the victims or if they were killed, the family of the victims. They can be punished by not being allowed to be part of different international communities or treaties. Embargos is another way. See Cuba.
The part you got confused about states that it is hard to be pro-Christ and Pro-America at the same time. just like Jesus said it is easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Christ.
Danz
Mac where there is a will there is a way. you wouldn't be the first to live like this. If you are more worried about foreclosing homes than GOD's purity, than yes, you will have a dillema.
Mac
The Bible doesn't tell me I can't own a home, shop at the market, or that I have to eat dumpster food to be pure, I merely have to put faith in Christ as Lord and Savoir and I am positionally as pure as He. It doesn't matter which Country I become a part of, they are all filled with wicked people and corrupt government. We are to be in the world but not of it. We are certainly not to become Monks. We are to live a Christ like as we can in the midst of wickedness and spread the gospel while also attempting to bring justice into unjust situations. People at our church regularly boycott companies such as Abercrombie and Fitch and others that are immoral in many ways, but there is no way you can avoid association with every evil company. However, it is very simple and clear cut for me, that if you are asking for charity money to give to an organization that murders innocent children, that would certainly be an organization I would want to avoid.
Danz
Yes, we all agree that we want to not only avoid baby killing companies but encourage our friends to avoid them as well, speak out against them, and do everything in your power legally to shut them down.
The Bible doesn't say not to own a home, nor does it say you must own a home. But it clearly says not to associate yourselves with evil, seek justice and depend the oppressed. How are you defending the oppressed if you are financing, supporting, or being silent about the oppressor. We know what Defend means. It means to deny access, stop, prevent, etc. Owning a home is secondary to God's commandments, I would imagine. The Bible says if your eye is causing you to sin, it is better to cut it off. I would imagine that if your house is causing you to associate or support evil, which is clearly a sin, than it might be better to burn it down. And wait for your golden mansion in heaven. Merely putting faith in Christ as Lord is not enough and I think You know this Mac. If not the bible would be a lot shorter. Live like Christ and spread the gospel. This is the same Christ who took 3 years out of his life to go walk around doing just that. He was not worried about his mortgage or his job at that time. The same Christ who had to go borrow a donkey (I'm assuming he couldn't pay for it) to make his grand entrance. The same Christ who never asked us to have nice highways, big air conditioned houses, or nice cars. If you want to be like Christ these things will not be a priority to us. But we have the choice to have these things, and I think it's best to have things that help you live more comfortably. But you may have to sacrifice them and things of the world, extreme measures, if you want to do more than just have faith. And yes He expects more out of us then just belief. But that is the first step.
Mac
Yes, If Christ called me to sacrifice My house for His Kingdom then I would be willing, however, my house can also be used for service in His Kingdom as well. There is really no possible way to disassociate in every way from evil, we live in a evil world. Komen is giving money to an organization who purposely, proudly and unashamedly murders babies to make it's profit. It not only does this thing but encourages women to continue to do it as if it is a good and honorable thing to do.
Danz
I think we agree on that.
Me
--"But it clearly says not to associate yourselves with evil, seek justice and depend the oppressed. How are you defending the oppressed if you are financing, supporting, or being silent about the oppressor."
And it said to pay taxes to the gov't, which at the time of writing was Rome, who was persecuting and murdering Christians. That is the worst crime anyone could commit, and the NT tells us to pay taxes to that gov't, for it is instituted by God.
--"Merely putting faith in Christ as Lord is not enough and I think You know this Mac."
This assertion needs some supporting biblical exegesis. How do you know this is true? And what do you mean by "not enough"? Not enough for what purpose and end?
--"The same Christ who never asked us to have nice highways, big air conditioned houses, or nice cars. "
And the same one who never ripped those of His followers who did have wealth. Rather, He instructed them what to do with what God had given them.
OK, a few other things.
--"The skills to sew and weave can be taught, learned and improved (upon)."
And is that a better use of my time than what I'm doing now? Who are you to judge?
Maybe you have an answer. Do you farm and get from the dumpster ALL your food? If not, how have you quieted your sensitive conscience? Do you make your own clothes? How do you have time to work a job? Do you work for an evil corporation?
Are you proposing that we only do business with people who have no sin? How would you propose we go about doing that? Which people are you referring to? Why did Jesus buy food from sinners?
Finally, you say Jesus does not ignore guilt, but you're HOPING He's understanding. Understanding of what? The fact that you demonstrate you don't care to follow God's law and that you break it every day many times? What's the answer here?
Danz
@ Rhology, If I understand the timeline correctly, there were no christians yet when Jesus told people to pay taxes. Christians came "after" Christ. I could be wrong about this. It was Judah, and after Jesus Christ came the Christians. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't have said to pay taxes to an evil government anyways.
Now, I've been in enough Biblical debates to know that the verses can seem to fight with one another. I show you a verse that says do this, and then you throw a verse at me that says do that. And than you have 1000 different denominations spring up from the unclearity. We know that it is impossible (or insane) for GOD to have instituted every government. Because this becomes subjective to human definition of government and human recognition of government. I can start a government up in the mountains and slowly and illegally start taking over city by city. So at some point people will be under two different governments, and therefore it is impossible to submit to both at the same time. Government is an agreement or understanding of who is in charge. Even if it is not agreed upon. This is a complicated concept.
In 1804 a bunch of African Slaves in Haiti, decided they would take up arms against the French government instituted by GOD, as you say. After winning, and even before, they formed their own government but it was not recognized by the other countries, only to the former slaves. During the 12 years of war, whose government did GOD instill? the French or the Slaves? It's complicated. But GOD told me once that some truths is what we humans decide it is, collectively. Like time and how we define these tricky words, like government, slavery, etc.
Danz
James 2:14-26 faith without works is dead. Look it up
Danz
Jesus has nothing against wealth. Unless it comes in the way of his mission and yours. Just like anything else.
Danz
Who am I to judge? Another loving human being who wants to live in a better world and understands that we are linked. Your actions affect me, as do mine. I am also assuming that you are a believer in Christ and the Bible. So as a friendly human, I am not judging but simply pointing out some things the book you might be following says. Just a reminder and encouragment.
Danz
I do not eat dumpster food nor live like a monk. I am being totally honest with myself in saying I am not reaching the goal. And I find it very very very difficult in this type of setting of a culture and society. But I am saying IF I were to work in a Christ like manner, this should be my thinking. I think the point is not if you make it to the NBA, but that you did everything in your power to do so. So it's not to be perfect but to do everything physically and mentally/spiritually possible to reach this Godly perfection. But of course no one will. Like no NBA player will have a perfect game with no mistakes at all.
Last thing, about Jesus being understanding. This is not biblical but based on my limited understanding. I hope Jesus will consider the confusion in some minds, the manipulations of others, the not-so-clear communication, the many false prophets so convincing, and the method used to deliver the message. I hope Jesus is loving and understanding enough to understand that some people just don't know. And this does not mean they are rejecting him if they doubt the messenger. Messengers lie all the time. I hope he can understand that some people's introduction to Christ came with guns, rape, and murder. If they reject the word, I hope Jesus is at least considering the situation. I find it very hard to believe, considering some situations that a loving Jesus would send some to Hell after the Hell they just went through. I can just hope. Like I said this is not Biblical my line of thinking.
Me
--" But it clearly says not to associate yourselves with evil"
And it also allows us (and even tells us sometimes) to buy from sinners.
Buying from != associating with. That might be your problem right there.
--"seek justice and depend the oppressed. "
So why aren't you an abolitionist?
--"How are you defending the oppressed if you are financing, supporting, or being silent about the oppressor."
A man can't do everything. Don't hate because I do something, and it's not the sthg you prefer.
Also, your whole presence on this thread serves as a distraction from the evil that Mac was pointing out. You're not helping anyone here.
--"The Bible says if your eye is causing you to sin, it is better to cut it off"
And in context, that means what?
--"I would imagine that if your house is causing you to associate or support evil, which is clearly a sin, than it might be better to burn it down."
Except that the Bible nowhere begrudges us to own homes that might have been sold to us by sinners.
Somehow they thought there was more to it than you think there is, and that's because you're being too simplistic.
--"This is the same Christ who took 3 years out of his life to go walk around doing just that."
And who stayed with His supporters sometimes who did own houses. Like Matthew. And He didn't rip them for that b/c He recognised there's more to it than your simplistic view.
--"If I understand the timeline correctly, there were no christians yet when Jesus told people to pay taxes. "
The disciples and all Jesus' followers were Christians. This is false.
--" I show you a verse that says do this, and then you throw a verse at me that says do that. "
So the honest thing to do is to take BOTH of them and figure out a theology that allows BOTH of them to say what they say.
--" than you have 1000 different denominations spring up from the unclearity"
The same Bible, but different humans.
I'd say the problem lies with the humans, not the Bible. You're familiar with sin, right?
--"We know that it is impossible (or insane) for GOD to have instituted every government. "
No, we do not know that.
Don't you know that God uses all men, even evil ones, for His purposes?
Read Romans 13, 1 Peter, Obadiah, Nahum, and Habakkuk, please.
--"This is a complicated concept. "
Well, irrelevant. Not so much complicated as irrelevant.
--" James 2:14-26 faith without works is dead"
And what does that have to do with what I asked you?
When's the last time you read James 2:10? And what does it have to do with the question at hand, since you cited James 2?
--"Who am I to judge? Another loving human being who wants to live in a better world and understands that we are linked. Your actions affect me, as do mine. "
Yes, they do. And yet Jesus didn't give you the right to judge me on this basis, even though He knew "we are all linked". I'm sorry, but I'll listen to Jesus and not you.
--"And I find it very very very difficult in this type of setting of a culture and society. "
Not "difficult". It's literally impossible to avoid doing business with sinners.
--" I hope Jesus will consider the confusion in some minds, the manipulations of others, the not-so-clear communication, the many false prophets so convincing, and the method used to deliver the message."
He will also consider all the sin and hypocrisy.
You have no hope by your own works.
Let me give you the answer here - you have nothing to offer God except disgusting, evil, tainted horror. You have a responsibility to repent before Jesus and beg for His mercy.
He will grant it b/c He died on the cross for evildoers like you and me. The diff between us is that I recognise my evil and have repented. You need to repent, and right now. Today is the day of salvation. Repent, be saved, then read the Bible faithfully and obey it. Give a right confession to those who ask, like I just did. I asked and you said you hope Jesus will consider that you have excuses. Dead wrong. You have ZERO excuse. You have only one hope - Jesus' blood and sacrifice. Depend on it, tell others about it. That is the Gospel.
--" Like I said this is not Biblical my line of thinking."
That is very clear - it is not Biblical.
Stop and consider that you know nothing for certain about God outside the Bible. So you need to stop imagining stuff about God and seek the real authentic God. I pray you will, for the wrath stored up against you is great.
If I performed breast exams to screen for cancer for free, and I also murdered small children, would you support me with your donations? Susan G. Komen would.
Mac
http://ww5.komen.org/Content.aspx?id=16162
Me
https://twitter.com/#!/Rhology/status/121325207481876480 @LarryFitzgerald FYI Susan Komen funds Planned Parenthood. :-( http://t.co/JH6l9Xfl
Mac
http://liveaction.org/blog/planned-parenthood-ceos-false-mammogram-claim-exposed/
Mac
I guess I should.change the quote to "if I claimed to provide breast exams..."
BC
perspective. As long as it is kept quiet the part about you murdering babies, the public will choose to overlook it. That and as long as you claim that the exams are the central part of what you do and that killing babies is just a small percentage of what you do (kind of like a side business)
Danz
With this line of thinking I fear one would have to make a very tough decision. You guys are going to go crazy, move up into the mountains in isolation if you do not want to contribute to evil. Actually even if you did isolate yourself you would still be in some way contributing to evil. Don't you guys pay taxes to the US government? If yes, you are contributing to all their evils. Every time you spend a dollar, part of your taxes go to doing evil. (for a good cause of course.) You support the tobacco industry everytime you support those who sell tobacco, which is every gas station in America. SO what do you do? Stop buying gas? And don't even think about the gas and it's evils. Maybe we should stop using gas. My point is this: Either way you will be supporting that guy killing babies, as long as he does breast exams. For stopping the breast exams would be evil in another way. It's like hitting your head on a wall, which I've almost tried a few times.
Mac
except for the fact.that from what I have.read, planned parenthood just pretended to do mammograms, and there are other places to go and get them that dont murder children.
Me
Correct. We can't avoid indirectly contributing to evil, can't avoid paying taxes. We are in fact commanded to pay taxes, and that to an evil government, at least twice in the New Testament!
We are also encouraged to be wise and not participate in evil when we don't have to. Nobody has to give money to Susan Komen. If you want to help women and cancer, give money to someone who is not into dismembering babies.
Danz
So Rhology, the Bible says you must pay your taxes. So would you say the American Revolution That was based on the refusal to pay taxes to England, a bad thing and violation against God's law? So basically the American Independence is forged in disobedience to the Bible. Would you agree to that? Furthermore, if you don't support Susan Komen, you'll just be supporting someone who supports other evils by shopping at Walmart or buying from McDonalds, two of the biggest exploitative capitalist corporations in the world. Surly these evils are as valuable. My point is, there is no way around it unless you make a TRUE commitment to be a weirdo. Last thing about the taxes and government thing, if you were German during the killing of the jews, would you disassociate yourself with the German government or follow the Bible rule to submit yourself to authority for HE is the one who establishes all authorities. (a mind twister in itself since many authorities are established through revolution and in direct violation to that rule.) Anyways, it's either we agree that the Bible standards are too high for us, or we agree that we are falling way under par to the expectations of Christ.
Me
Hi Dan!
I think the justifiability of the AmRev is an open question. So yes, it's definitely possible that American independence is forged in disobedience. I'm not sure what the relevance is, though.
Yes, WalMart does bad things, but pretty much any grocer does, and I have to buy groceries.
Besides, you don't solve this question by what's known as a "tu quoque" - saying "you do bad stuff too!"
You solve it by saying "OK, I'll stop doing the bad thing you've identified insofar as it lies within my ability."
So, to be reasonable, you need to NOT say the former. You need to say the latter.
No, I would not support an evil gov't that was murdering Jews. There are most certainly grades of evil, and not accepting mass murder is more important than not accepting submission to the gov't.
I agree that we are falling way under par to the expectations of Christ. Two things:
1) That does not mean that we have the right to ignore His expectations.
2) Since you have fallen short, what is the answer? Are you not guilty? Does Jesus ignore guilt?
(I'm not disclaiming guilt. I'm asking what YOUR answer is.)
Danz
Hi Rhology, my answer would be to be real with ourselves and honest with each other. No hypocrisy. I agree however, that the solution it to stop doing bad. But we need to understand that this will require extreme measures.
Why? Because the level of evil has reach an extreme measure. You say you have to buy groceries. No you don't. You can grow your own food. Yes, your diet would be much different but there are other ways. I have a friend in Denver who gets all his food from dumpsters. Near expired canned food mostly. And on my last visit he fed me dumpster food because the thinks it's stupid to pay for food when so much is wasting. That is an extreme measure based on a belief.
Yes, we fall short, but are we even trying to reach a certain point. You don't HAVE to wear exploitation clothing. But it is easy to do so. Again you can find clothes that are not based on exploitation or you can make your own also. But then you would have to sacrifice name brands. Are you willing to do this to get closer to the standard of Christ?
Last think, the relevance of the AmRev is that it seems you are willing to justify Biblical disobedience in certain cases. For example, it is less bad to not accept submission to govt. (even though this is a direct order from God), than to support the govt in killing Jews. But then if your government was killing Arabs on the other side of the globe, it might not be so bad. Since surely those Arabs are in disobedience, we like to say.
I feel like I'm going in circles. If you believe the AmRev was done against GOD's will, would you say it shouldn't have been done? That it was wrong for happening and did not have GOD's blessing? And as the Bible teaches we must repent for our sins and even work to repay our debts. I think you see where I'm going? Do you believe in reparations for victims of a crime of some sort, or punishment for the aggressors? do you think the American Government should have to pay for it's crimes or get a free pass. And should the victims receive anything for their pain?
All these questions play into the honesty and fairness that the Bible teaches. If you are truly advocating for Christ and his teachings you will obviously be encouraging things that for sure are not in the general interest of the American people. But those are the extreme measures I am talking about.
Me
Tell you what, we can debate about the merits of buying groceries from big companies later.
I would hope we could at least agree that we shouldn't give money to an org that intentionally gives money to dismembering babies. It's not that hard, and it's not very complext either.
As for clothing, all of mine is either inherited from my brothers or is bought at the thrift store. I can guarantee I'm not contributing to "exploitation". I also lack the skills to sew and weave.
Be that as it may, I didn't see you answer my big questions there at the end. I would really like to ask you to answer them. They're extremely important.
--"if your government was killing Arabs on the other side of the globe, it might not be so bad"
What did I say that gave you the impression that I support the US' involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan? And Libya? And Uganda? And Pakistan? And on and on...
--"If you believe the AmRev was done against GOD's will, would you say it shouldn't have been done?"
When I said I think the justifiability of the AmRev is an open question, I meant precisely what I said.
--"That it was wrong for happening and did not have GOD's blessing?"
That's far too simplistic. Not everyone does things for the same reasons, and several 100s of 1000s of ppl were involved in the AmRev.
--"do you think the American Government should have to pay for it's crimes or get a free pass."
I'm unsure how a government would pay for crimes.
--"If you are truly advocating for Christ and his teachings you will obviously be encouraging things that for sure are not in the general interest of the American people."
Obeying God is always in the best interest of people. You sort of got confused there at the end, bringing up a variety of things that are not very relevant. Could you please answer my main two challenges from last comment?
Mac
Danz, how much dumpster food would be available if everybody ate it? How much time would one have to grow all their food, work full time, raise a family etc. Should I quit my job and ignore my family in order to grow all my own food? Where would I grow it after my house was foreclosed upon?
Danz
Ok the two main questions:
1. Are you not guilty? and 2. Does Jesus ignore guilt?
1. when you say YOU do you mean ME personally or us in general? If me, Yes. if in general, HELL YEAH! As far as the Bible standards we are all guilty. 2. Jesus does not ignore guilt. But I am hoping that he is understanding.
Yes, i think it is best to not give money to an organization that is doing wrong.
The skills to sew and weave can be taught, learned and improved a pond.
I assume you support US wars because your taxes finances it. And I do know if you are in a movement to end the wars.
Open ended questions need addressed.
100 or 1000s of people were involved in the AmRev just like millions are involved in abortions or the slave trade. Everyone has their reasons but bottom line is that it is wrong or it is right. Not to mention the killings.
Governments can pay for their crimes through reparations to the victims or if they were killed, the family of the victims. They can be punished by not being allowed to be part of different international communities or treaties. Embargos is another way. See Cuba.
The part you got confused about states that it is hard to be pro-Christ and Pro-America at the same time. just like Jesus said it is easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Christ.
Danz
Mac where there is a will there is a way. you wouldn't be the first to live like this. If you are more worried about foreclosing homes than GOD's purity, than yes, you will have a dillema.
Mac
The Bible doesn't tell me I can't own a home, shop at the market, or that I have to eat dumpster food to be pure, I merely have to put faith in Christ as Lord and Savoir and I am positionally as pure as He. It doesn't matter which Country I become a part of, they are all filled with wicked people and corrupt government. We are to be in the world but not of it. We are certainly not to become Monks. We are to live a Christ like as we can in the midst of wickedness and spread the gospel while also attempting to bring justice into unjust situations. People at our church regularly boycott companies such as Abercrombie and Fitch and others that are immoral in many ways, but there is no way you can avoid association with every evil company. However, it is very simple and clear cut for me, that if you are asking for charity money to give to an organization that murders innocent children, that would certainly be an organization I would want to avoid.
Danz
Yes, we all agree that we want to not only avoid baby killing companies but encourage our friends to avoid them as well, speak out against them, and do everything in your power legally to shut them down.
The Bible doesn't say not to own a home, nor does it say you must own a home. But it clearly says not to associate yourselves with evil, seek justice and depend the oppressed. How are you defending the oppressed if you are financing, supporting, or being silent about the oppressor. We know what Defend means. It means to deny access, stop, prevent, etc. Owning a home is secondary to God's commandments, I would imagine. The Bible says if your eye is causing you to sin, it is better to cut it off. I would imagine that if your house is causing you to associate or support evil, which is clearly a sin, than it might be better to burn it down. And wait for your golden mansion in heaven. Merely putting faith in Christ as Lord is not enough and I think You know this Mac. If not the bible would be a lot shorter. Live like Christ and spread the gospel. This is the same Christ who took 3 years out of his life to go walk around doing just that. He was not worried about his mortgage or his job at that time. The same Christ who had to go borrow a donkey (I'm assuming he couldn't pay for it) to make his grand entrance. The same Christ who never asked us to have nice highways, big air conditioned houses, or nice cars. If you want to be like Christ these things will not be a priority to us. But we have the choice to have these things, and I think it's best to have things that help you live more comfortably. But you may have to sacrifice them and things of the world, extreme measures, if you want to do more than just have faith. And yes He expects more out of us then just belief. But that is the first step.
Mac
Yes, If Christ called me to sacrifice My house for His Kingdom then I would be willing, however, my house can also be used for service in His Kingdom as well. There is really no possible way to disassociate in every way from evil, we live in a evil world. Komen is giving money to an organization who purposely, proudly and unashamedly murders babies to make it's profit. It not only does this thing but encourages women to continue to do it as if it is a good and honorable thing to do.
Danz
I think we agree on that.
Me
--"But it clearly says not to associate yourselves with evil, seek justice and depend the oppressed. How are you defending the oppressed if you are financing, supporting, or being silent about the oppressor."
And it said to pay taxes to the gov't, which at the time of writing was Rome, who was persecuting and murdering Christians. That is the worst crime anyone could commit, and the NT tells us to pay taxes to that gov't, for it is instituted by God.
--"Merely putting faith in Christ as Lord is not enough and I think You know this Mac."
This assertion needs some supporting biblical exegesis. How do you know this is true? And what do you mean by "not enough"? Not enough for what purpose and end?
--"The same Christ who never asked us to have nice highways, big air conditioned houses, or nice cars. "
And the same one who never ripped those of His followers who did have wealth. Rather, He instructed them what to do with what God had given them.
OK, a few other things.
--"The skills to sew and weave can be taught, learned and improved (upon)."
And is that a better use of my time than what I'm doing now? Who are you to judge?
Maybe you have an answer. Do you farm and get from the dumpster ALL your food? If not, how have you quieted your sensitive conscience? Do you make your own clothes? How do you have time to work a job? Do you work for an evil corporation?
Are you proposing that we only do business with people who have no sin? How would you propose we go about doing that? Which people are you referring to? Why did Jesus buy food from sinners?
Finally, you say Jesus does not ignore guilt, but you're HOPING He's understanding. Understanding of what? The fact that you demonstrate you don't care to follow God's law and that you break it every day many times? What's the answer here?
Danz
@ Rhology, If I understand the timeline correctly, there were no christians yet when Jesus told people to pay taxes. Christians came "after" Christ. I could be wrong about this. It was Judah, and after Jesus Christ came the Christians. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't have said to pay taxes to an evil government anyways.
Now, I've been in enough Biblical debates to know that the verses can seem to fight with one another. I show you a verse that says do this, and then you throw a verse at me that says do that. And than you have 1000 different denominations spring up from the unclearity. We know that it is impossible (or insane) for GOD to have instituted every government. Because this becomes subjective to human definition of government and human recognition of government. I can start a government up in the mountains and slowly and illegally start taking over city by city. So at some point people will be under two different governments, and therefore it is impossible to submit to both at the same time. Government is an agreement or understanding of who is in charge. Even if it is not agreed upon. This is a complicated concept.
In 1804 a bunch of African Slaves in Haiti, decided they would take up arms against the French government instituted by GOD, as you say. After winning, and even before, they formed their own government but it was not recognized by the other countries, only to the former slaves. During the 12 years of war, whose government did GOD instill? the French or the Slaves? It's complicated. But GOD told me once that some truths is what we humans decide it is, collectively. Like time and how we define these tricky words, like government, slavery, etc.
Danz
James 2:14-26 faith without works is dead. Look it up
Danz
Jesus has nothing against wealth. Unless it comes in the way of his mission and yours. Just like anything else.
Danz
Who am I to judge? Another loving human being who wants to live in a better world and understands that we are linked. Your actions affect me, as do mine. I am also assuming that you are a believer in Christ and the Bible. So as a friendly human, I am not judging but simply pointing out some things the book you might be following says. Just a reminder and encouragment.
Danz
I do not eat dumpster food nor live like a monk. I am being totally honest with myself in saying I am not reaching the goal. And I find it very very very difficult in this type of setting of a culture and society. But I am saying IF I were to work in a Christ like manner, this should be my thinking. I think the point is not if you make it to the NBA, but that you did everything in your power to do so. So it's not to be perfect but to do everything physically and mentally/spiritually possible to reach this Godly perfection. But of course no one will. Like no NBA player will have a perfect game with no mistakes at all.
Last thing, about Jesus being understanding. This is not biblical but based on my limited understanding. I hope Jesus will consider the confusion in some minds, the manipulations of others, the not-so-clear communication, the many false prophets so convincing, and the method used to deliver the message. I hope Jesus is loving and understanding enough to understand that some people just don't know. And this does not mean they are rejecting him if they doubt the messenger. Messengers lie all the time. I hope he can understand that some people's introduction to Christ came with guns, rape, and murder. If they reject the word, I hope Jesus is at least considering the situation. I find it very hard to believe, considering some situations that a loving Jesus would send some to Hell after the Hell they just went through. I can just hope. Like I said this is not Biblical my line of thinking.
Me
--" But it clearly says not to associate yourselves with evil"
And it also allows us (and even tells us sometimes) to buy from sinners.
Buying from != associating with. That might be your problem right there.
--"seek justice and depend the oppressed. "
So why aren't you an abolitionist?
--"How are you defending the oppressed if you are financing, supporting, or being silent about the oppressor."
A man can't do everything. Don't hate because I do something, and it's not the sthg you prefer.
Also, your whole presence on this thread serves as a distraction from the evil that Mac was pointing out. You're not helping anyone here.
--"The Bible says if your eye is causing you to sin, it is better to cut it off"
And in context, that means what?
--"I would imagine that if your house is causing you to associate or support evil, which is clearly a sin, than it might be better to burn it down."
Except that the Bible nowhere begrudges us to own homes that might have been sold to us by sinners.
Somehow they thought there was more to it than you think there is, and that's because you're being too simplistic.
--"This is the same Christ who took 3 years out of his life to go walk around doing just that."
And who stayed with His supporters sometimes who did own houses. Like Matthew. And He didn't rip them for that b/c He recognised there's more to it than your simplistic view.
--"If I understand the timeline correctly, there were no christians yet when Jesus told people to pay taxes. "
The disciples and all Jesus' followers were Christians. This is false.
--" I show you a verse that says do this, and then you throw a verse at me that says do that. "
So the honest thing to do is to take BOTH of them and figure out a theology that allows BOTH of them to say what they say.
--" than you have 1000 different denominations spring up from the unclearity"
The same Bible, but different humans.
I'd say the problem lies with the humans, not the Bible. You're familiar with sin, right?
--"We know that it is impossible (or insane) for GOD to have instituted every government. "
No, we do not know that.
Don't you know that God uses all men, even evil ones, for His purposes?
Read Romans 13, 1 Peter, Obadiah, Nahum, and Habakkuk, please.
--"This is a complicated concept. "
Well, irrelevant. Not so much complicated as irrelevant.
--" James 2:14-26 faith without works is dead"
And what does that have to do with what I asked you?
When's the last time you read James 2:10? And what does it have to do with the question at hand, since you cited James 2?
--"Who am I to judge? Another loving human being who wants to live in a better world and understands that we are linked. Your actions affect me, as do mine. "
Yes, they do. And yet Jesus didn't give you the right to judge me on this basis, even though He knew "we are all linked". I'm sorry, but I'll listen to Jesus and not you.
--"And I find it very very very difficult in this type of setting of a culture and society. "
Not "difficult". It's literally impossible to avoid doing business with sinners.
--" I hope Jesus will consider the confusion in some minds, the manipulations of others, the not-so-clear communication, the many false prophets so convincing, and the method used to deliver the message."
He will also consider all the sin and hypocrisy.
You have no hope by your own works.
Let me give you the answer here - you have nothing to offer God except disgusting, evil, tainted horror. You have a responsibility to repent before Jesus and beg for His mercy.
He will grant it b/c He died on the cross for evildoers like you and me. The diff between us is that I recognise my evil and have repented. You need to repent, and right now. Today is the day of salvation. Repent, be saved, then read the Bible faithfully and obey it. Give a right confession to those who ask, like I just did. I asked and you said you hope Jesus will consider that you have excuses. Dead wrong. You have ZERO excuse. You have only one hope - Jesus' blood and sacrifice. Depend on it, tell others about it. That is the Gospel.
--" Like I said this is not Biblical my line of thinking."
That is very clear - it is not Biblical.
Stop and consider that you know nothing for certain about God outside the Bible. So you need to stop imagining stuff about God and seek the real authentic God. I pray you will, for the wrath stored up against you is great.
Friday, October 14, 2011
David still doesn't get it
Fri Oct 14, 02:33:00 AM CDT
1) This is in effect just saying "well, I concede it's fallacious, but I KNOW IT WORKS!!!!" That's begging the question, and it's another expression of David's blind faith religion.
Plenty of untrue things "work". Placebos "work". Newtonian mechanics "work". False religions lead people to do virtuous things. Etc.
2) Why not just address the actual problem? Or does it not bother David to commit logical fallacies? It wouldn't surprise me, given that he is an atheist.
3) I'm unsure how many times I have to say this, but I'll just repeat it again: Christianity is the foundation for science. It solves the logical fallacy I've identified, but atheism does not solve it.
Thus, Christianity gives us science. Atheism gives us nothing.
Because God keeps the world running in an orderly fashion and has put in place regular, predictable physical processes, we can trust that the future will generally be like the past.
On atheism, as we've seen, there is zero reasonn to expect such.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Bad answers to bad questions
zilch tried gamely to answer my bad questions with good answers, but it didn't work out well for him.
I trust other people, as I must
1) You think you must, but you can't prove that.
2) Bottom line - you have faith in people you can't prove exist. I have faith in Jesus whom you think I can't prove exists.
I like Jesus better. Until you can produce some good reason not to think Jesus exists, I don't see why not follow Him.
3) Are you conceding that empiricism is a false epistemology? Your lack of defense of it makes you sound like you are. Makes me wonder how you think you know anything. Maybe you have blind faith in other humans, but why pick and choose? And of course, why not embrace solipsism?
Er, no, the "other appeals to authority" would be what you religious guys do
You just did it above. I'm sorry you're so blind to how you actually act, but all I can do is point it out over and over and hope you get it. I'm sure the readers do.
Scientific authorities can be checked by duplicating their work
Any scientific judgment commits the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent. Piling fallacy upon fallacy does not get you CLOSER to truth. More fallacies are worse than less.
In the end, it's the facts that count, not the authorities.
So why are you continually appealing to authorities? How are you personally checking their work to make sure it's factual?
And in the end, it's INTERPRETATION OF FACTS that counts, not facts themselves.
Fact: There's a rock.
Question: How old is it?
Answer: Depends on the presuppositions brought to the study of the rock.
If this is what you call "blind faith", that the sun will rise tomorrow, then you've just rendered the expression meaningless
You can keep saying it makes the expression meaningless, but that doesn't change anything. You're just uncomfortable with the appellation so you're hoping you can bully me into not saying it.
You have no evidence that the sun will rise tomorrow, nor that any physical process/law will remain in place. You also have no evidence that the physical processes/laws you think you observe were in place 300 years ago when nobody was paying attention. You have faith, blind faith.
NOT to call what you have 'blind faith' would render the expression meaningless!
because by your usage, everything is blind faith.
That's not even close to the case. Too bad you're too busy thinking of bad arguments so you won't have to listen to the truth that you don't pay attention and learn about the truth. You're heading for wrathful judgment, and it will be fully deserved.
z: Uniformitarianism is the necessary basis of any world we can hope to describe
That's just an assertion, and is blatantly false. The Christian WV handles it just fine.
How is this false, blatantly or otherwise?
The Christian worldview, as said before, provides for natural processes and laws just fine.
That's why.
Ironically, the atheist wv doesn't.
If we can't rely on the sun rising tomorrow, or on gravity holding us down, how could we know anything about the world?
Great question!
Answer: YOU CAN'T.
That's why I say that atheism is absurd. By George, I think you may be finally making some progress.
I don't have to "assume" uniformitarianism: I observe it,
That's false. You observe an infinitessimally tiny fraction of all incidents and processes at work in the entire universe. I mean, it's ridiculously small. Every day the ratio composed of:
NUMERATOR: things and events you observe
__________________________________________
DENOMINATOR: all things and events on Earth (to say nothing of all things and events in the universe)
grow smaller and smaller.
Have you observed 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of all things and events since the origin of time?
How could you even know? And what difference would shaving a few significant figures off here or there make?
You need to pry open your mind and realise how little you really know.
I observe it, and it accounts for the data.
1) And YEC accounts for the data too.
2) You need to prove that data carries any meaning, on atheism.
3) I'm not impressed when someone tells me that they've seen their hypothesis account for 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of all possible observations that could be made. I doubt you're much impressed on any other issue, but of course since you're emotionally involved with this one, you won't be consistent here.
3) If we're talking on Christianity, no, it doesn't account for the data, not even close, since God's Word is also data (in fact, it's infallible eyewitness testimony).
If you characterize the atheistic belief that the sun will rise tomorrow as "viciously circular blind faith", then I guess you should be happy you have a worldview where God tells you that the sun will rise.
That's funny. I am pretty happy about that, that I have a reason to think it will (but if it doesn't rise tomorrow, I'll be in the Eschaton, and I'd be even happier about that). The question is: why, since you don't have a reason to think it will, aren't you looking for a worldview that actually accounts for this kind of stuff?
Oh, I know, it's b/c the Bible says you hate God, and your emotions and evil heart lead you away from Jesus.
All you've got is a bald assertion that you can be sure of stuff we atheists can't be sure of, nothing more.
This may come as a surprise, but you're not God. Just talking doesn't change reality.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
My mission
I am currently raising support for the purpose of moving to France on a career basis, though my departure date is currently unknown.
The mission and goal that God has put on my heart is to share the good news of Jesus and the gift of eternal life with the many North African Muslims that live in France. They come from countries where less than 1% of the population loves Jesus, and they have come into a country where less than 2% of the population loves Jesus. Who will reach out to these precious people, Algerian and Moroccan Arabs, Kabyle and Shawiya Berbers?
My wife and I speak French fluently already, so there is no need for language training beforehand. We plan to do a mixture of the following activities as far as outreach:
-Evangelism through tract and booklet distribution
--on the street
--at seaports
--perhaps door to door
-Evangelism through open-air preaching
--I love Ray Comfort's preaching (though his apologetics, not quite as much)
-Seeking extended conversation and relationship, flowing out of these activities
--When we actually live there, we can arrange to meet people later and indeed will seek to do so, often
--We seek not to win debates, but to win people
-Pursuing relationship with the people we meet
--Meeting people and asking them to meet later over coffee/tea/meals
--Getting our families together
--Holidays like Christmas and Easter, and like iftar meals during Ramadan
-Offering free English and French classes
--Many N Africans, especially women, do not even speak French
--We have ESL teaching experience
-Discipling new believers in Jesus and planting churches
--The goal is to get them started and stable, then get out of the way
We are part of a missions agency that has been evangelising Europe for almost 60 years. We have already been appointed by them and our church's elders are 100% behind our going out, though we will of course remain under their leadership, authority, and accountability, even when on the foreign field.
I post this here to ask that any reader prayerfully consider supporting my family and me as we build up our team of partners. As you support us, you yourself join in the effort to share the Gospel with people who desperately need to hear the truth, and you sow blessing (2 Corinthians 8-9, Philippians 4:14-19). May the Lord richly bless all who read and all who are led to give.
Feel free to ask for clarification via email.
Thank you.
You can donate at my mission agency's website.
DONATE HERE
At the This box is for additional detail regarding the designation of your gift. (Name of Project or ministry you would like to support. box, please input "Rhology". That will be directed into my missions account.
Thank you, and may the Lord bless you.
-Rhology
The mission and goal that God has put on my heart is to share the good news of Jesus and the gift of eternal life with the many North African Muslims that live in France. They come from countries where less than 1% of the population loves Jesus, and they have come into a country where less than 2% of the population loves Jesus. Who will reach out to these precious people, Algerian and Moroccan Arabs, Kabyle and Shawiya Berbers?
My wife and I speak French fluently already, so there is no need for language training beforehand. We plan to do a mixture of the following activities as far as outreach:
-Evangelism through tract and booklet distribution
--on the street
--at seaports
--perhaps door to door
-Evangelism through open-air preaching
--I love Ray Comfort's preaching (though his apologetics, not quite as much)
-Seeking extended conversation and relationship, flowing out of these activities
--When we actually live there, we can arrange to meet people later and indeed will seek to do so, often
--We seek not to win debates, but to win people
-Pursuing relationship with the people we meet
--Meeting people and asking them to meet later over coffee/tea/meals
--Getting our families together
--Holidays like Christmas and Easter, and like iftar meals during Ramadan
-Offering free English and French classes
--Many N Africans, especially women, do not even speak French
--We have ESL teaching experience
-Discipling new believers in Jesus and planting churches
--The goal is to get them started and stable, then get out of the way
We are part of a missions agency that has been evangelising Europe for almost 60 years. We have already been appointed by them and our church's elders are 100% behind our going out, though we will of course remain under their leadership, authority, and accountability, even when on the foreign field.
I post this here to ask that any reader prayerfully consider supporting my family and me as we build up our team of partners. As you support us, you yourself join in the effort to share the Gospel with people who desperately need to hear the truth, and you sow blessing (2 Corinthians 8-9, Philippians 4:14-19). May the Lord richly bless all who read and all who are led to give.
Feel free to ask for clarification via email.
Thank you.
You can donate at my mission agency's website.
DONATE HERE
At the This box is for additional detail regarding the designation of your gift. (Name of Project or ministry you would like to support. box, please input "Rhology". That will be directed into my missions account.
Thank you, and may the Lord bless you.
-Rhology
Monday, October 10, 2011
My message to a gay man, or, the Gospel
______,
I know things got a little heated over in that other thread.
I just wanted to make sure that everything was clear.
I do not believe I am better than you. I believe we are in the same predicament - we are both sinners. We are both dirty and vile in the sight of a holy God.
The Bible tells us about a God who will bring wrath and terrible judgment down upon sinners, because we break His law all the time. Homosexual sex is one way to break the law. I don't do that, but I break the law of God in countless other ways. Similarly, there are sins I do that you don't do. It doesn't matter how we break it; the problem is that we've broken it.
We deserve the penalty, which is eternal torment in Hell.
God offers us Jesus, to save us from our sin. If we put our full trust in Him AND IF WE REPENT OF OUR SIN, He will forgive us and give us the gift of eternal life. Repentance means turning away from sin, resolving to hate it and fight it. We won't always win and succeed, but we don't embrace it. We hate it. We say "I'm done with you" and turn away.
This is what the unrepentant homosexual DOES NOT DO. It's the same as an unrepentant thief, liar, witch, rapist, or murderer. If we don't repent, we don't have eternal life, and it's that simple.
If we continue to justify our sin and say "that thing that the BIble calls sinful, it's not really sinful", then that demonstrates that our hearts are not right before God still, that we have not hated sin, that we have not repented, that we have not turned away from sin.
Defending your "right" or something similar to perform homosexual sex acts demonstrates that your heart is still with the devil and your own selfishness, not with Jesus.
So I am pleading with you here. Repent of your sin. Trust Jesus. Ask Him to save you and help you live a holy life. Then walk in repentance of sin and refuse to give way to temptation, refuse to get into situations where you'll be strongly tempted. Read your Bible, obey it, find a church where people love Jesus and love sinners (because EVERYONE is a sinner; there's no place for holier-than-thou people in Jesus' church).
Will you do that?
If not, may I ask why not?
Peace to you.
I know things got a little heated over in that other thread.
I just wanted to make sure that everything was clear.
I do not believe I am better than you. I believe we are in the same predicament - we are both sinners. We are both dirty and vile in the sight of a holy God.
The Bible tells us about a God who will bring wrath and terrible judgment down upon sinners, because we break His law all the time. Homosexual sex is one way to break the law. I don't do that, but I break the law of God in countless other ways. Similarly, there are sins I do that you don't do. It doesn't matter how we break it; the problem is that we've broken it.
We deserve the penalty, which is eternal torment in Hell.
God offers us Jesus, to save us from our sin. If we put our full trust in Him AND IF WE REPENT OF OUR SIN, He will forgive us and give us the gift of eternal life. Repentance means turning away from sin, resolving to hate it and fight it. We won't always win and succeed, but we don't embrace it. We hate it. We say "I'm done with you" and turn away.
This is what the unrepentant homosexual DOES NOT DO. It's the same as an unrepentant thief, liar, witch, rapist, or murderer. If we don't repent, we don't have eternal life, and it's that simple.
If we continue to justify our sin and say "that thing that the BIble calls sinful, it's not really sinful", then that demonstrates that our hearts are not right before God still, that we have not hated sin, that we have not repented, that we have not turned away from sin.
Defending your "right" or something similar to perform homosexual sex acts demonstrates that your heart is still with the devil and your own selfishness, not with Jesus.
So I am pleading with you here. Repent of your sin. Trust Jesus. Ask Him to save you and help you live a holy life. Then walk in repentance of sin and refuse to give way to temptation, refuse to get into situations where you'll be strongly tempted. Read your Bible, obey it, find a church where people love Jesus and love sinners (because EVERYONE is a sinner; there's no place for holier-than-thou people in Jesus' church).
Will you do that?
If not, may I ask why not?
Peace to you.
Sunday, October 09, 2011
Bad questions with good answers
I was helping someone think of some common questions to toss out at an apologetics training course, and this is what I spit out on the fly. I think that all but one I've heard in the past week alone. It's amazing how easy it is to parrot stupid atheist arguments.
ARGUMENT FROM AUTHORITY
Do you really think you're right and pretty much all the scientists, professors, and scholars who study this issue are wrong? Isn't that pretty arrogant?
ARGUMENT FROM ASSUMED UNIFORMITARIANISM
We know that the Earth is really old, from radiometric dating, from drilling into ice cores in Antarctica, from geological strata. the evidence that the Earth is old is overwhelming. How in the world could this possibly be fit into the Bible myth?
ARGUMENT FROM FAITH IN ASSUMED EXTRAPOLATION
We know that organisms evolve. We see it around us all the time. What is stopping the little changes you admit take place from becoming big changes, say, from ape-like creature into a homo sapien?
ARGUMENT FROM ASSUMING TO KNOW GOD'S MIND
How is it possible, if the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, that we are seeing light beams from stars that are far more than 10,000 light years away?
ARGUMENT FROM BAD THEOLOGY
Why would God make all the evidence look like evolution is responsible for our evolution from a common ancestor?
ARGUMENT FROM AGGRESSIVE BELITTLING
Do you really think man co-existed with dinosaurs? What evidence do you have of that?
GOD OF THE GAPS
Why do we even have to think that God was involved, when natural processes like evolution are perfectly adequate explanations for what we see and the history of this planet and life? Aren't you just trying to insert a God where you don't understand something?
ARGUMENT FROM BAD ANALOGY
Why do you think God is responsible for creation? Why not Thor, or Zeus?
I think that if I were to ask you why you don't believe in either of those gods, you'd say it's because there's no evidence for them. And that's my exact same answer to you about Jesus. You're an atheist with respect to those other gods. I just disbelieve in one more god than you do.
ARGUMENT FROM AUTHORITY
Do you really think you're right and pretty much all the scientists, professors, and scholars who study this issue are wrong? Isn't that pretty arrogant?
ARGUMENT FROM ASSUMED UNIFORMITARIANISM
We know that the Earth is really old, from radiometric dating, from drilling into ice cores in Antarctica, from geological strata. the evidence that the Earth is old is overwhelming. How in the world could this possibly be fit into the Bible myth?
ARGUMENT FROM FAITH IN ASSUMED EXTRAPOLATION
We know that organisms evolve. We see it around us all the time. What is stopping the little changes you admit take place from becoming big changes, say, from ape-like creature into a homo sapien?
ARGUMENT FROM ASSUMING TO KNOW GOD'S MIND
How is it possible, if the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, that we are seeing light beams from stars that are far more than 10,000 light years away?
ARGUMENT FROM BAD THEOLOGY
Why would God make all the evidence look like evolution is responsible for our evolution from a common ancestor?
ARGUMENT FROM AGGRESSIVE BELITTLING
Do you really think man co-existed with dinosaurs? What evidence do you have of that?
GOD OF THE GAPS
Why do we even have to think that God was involved, when natural processes like evolution are perfectly adequate explanations for what we see and the history of this planet and life? Aren't you just trying to insert a God where you don't understand something?
ARGUMENT FROM BAD ANALOGY
Why do you think God is responsible for creation? Why not Thor, or Zeus?
I think that if I were to ask you why you don't believe in either of those gods, you'd say it's because there's no evidence for them. And that's my exact same answer to you about Jesus. You're an atheist with respect to those other gods. I just disbelieve in one more god than you do.
Saturday, October 08, 2011
Me on the Fundamentally Flawed podcast
I haven't actually listened to the recording yet so I can't vouch for its quality, but it was an interesting time at least.
I would not give myself a top grade for my performance, but given the 6-to-1 odds, I think I did about as well as perhaps I should expect. It was my first podcast, anyway, and in my experience it was different talking with people over Skype than it is in face-to-face encounters. Perhaps the novelty of the experience will give way to more familiarity with enough practice, but it was certainly different.
I'd like (God willing) to write a longer review later, but suffice it to say at this time that though the FF podcasters used some TAG-related verbiage and tried to turn the TAG back on me, they not only failed to do so but also continued to misunderstand how TAG relates to the consistency of one's worldview. At key points in the conversation this can be heard clearly, especially in the mocking tones of Jim.
I recommend the uncut version for those who aren't faint of heart. If you're interested in listening to it, three things to remember:
1) These are atheists and their language got quite rough there toward the end.
2) When you hear the Jim sort of erupt there at the end, I was both smiling and saddened by his response. There was obviously nothing to be gained by trying to cut in there, so I just let him hang himself with his own hatred.
3) I don't yet know how my voice will sound since I was talking into a mic built into the top of my netbook. I may well sound like I was yelling, but I didn't mean to. I had noise-dampening headphones on, and I was talking at a computer, so that didn't help my voice retain a low volume.
Enjoy, anyway. Comments are welcome, both friendly and unfriendly. I recognise there is a great deal of room for improvement.
While I believe I more than held my own, I recommend the previous show with SyeTenB and Eric Hovind to hear a more thorough thrashing of the FF podcasters' position.
The show (edited)
Uncut version
I would not give myself a top grade for my performance, but given the 6-to-1 odds, I think I did about as well as perhaps I should expect. It was my first podcast, anyway, and in my experience it was different talking with people over Skype than it is in face-to-face encounters. Perhaps the novelty of the experience will give way to more familiarity with enough practice, but it was certainly different.
I'd like (God willing) to write a longer review later, but suffice it to say at this time that though the FF podcasters used some TAG-related verbiage and tried to turn the TAG back on me, they not only failed to do so but also continued to misunderstand how TAG relates to the consistency of one's worldview. At key points in the conversation this can be heard clearly, especially in the mocking tones of Jim.
I recommend the uncut version for those who aren't faint of heart. If you're interested in listening to it, three things to remember:
1) These are atheists and their language got quite rough there toward the end.
2) When you hear the Jim sort of erupt there at the end, I was both smiling and saddened by his response. There was obviously nothing to be gained by trying to cut in there, so I just let him hang himself with his own hatred.
3) I don't yet know how my voice will sound since I was talking into a mic built into the top of my netbook. I may well sound like I was yelling, but I didn't mean to. I had noise-dampening headphones on, and I was talking at a computer, so that didn't help my voice retain a low volume.
Enjoy, anyway. Comments are welcome, both friendly and unfriendly. I recognise there is a great deal of room for improvement.
While I believe I more than held my own, I recommend the previous show with SyeTenB and Eric Hovind to hear a more thorough thrashing of the FF podcasters' position.
The show (edited)
Uncut version
Thursday, October 06, 2011
Alex Botten and feeling the love
If you're driving a long distance and need help staying awake, I recommend you take with you the mp3 of this recent podcast debate between EricHovind and Sye TenBruggencate on the one side and the Fundamentally Flawed podcasters (including Alex Botten) on the other.
The boorish, mocking behavior of the atheists combined with their stubborn refusal to answer even basic questions and their numerous pathetic tu quoques really served to raise my blood pressure by several percentage points while listening to it, so it's great road fuel.
I decided to let Alex Botten know about that.
@theealex Just wanted you to hear from a listener. @erichovind and SyeTenB wrecked your position. #podcast #fundamentallyflawed
@theealex Oh, and you and your friends were among the rudest and most closed-minded atheists I've encountered. Cheers! @erichovind
Then, from Alex:
@Rhology really? You think that? Well, thanks for taking the time out of your busy day to tell me! Sye and Eric don't have an argument tbh
From me:
@theealex It's so funny you mention that, b/c while I heard a lot of "we sense what we sense" from you, I heard quite a bit of argumentation
@theealex ...from Sye and @erichovind.
From Alex:
@Rhology ahahaha! Just looked at your blog! You're a YEC??? Come on! You may as well tattoo 'idiot' on your forehead
From me:
@theealex tattoo 'idiot' on your forehead>>Oooh, someone's ignorant of scientific antirealism! Maybe you think insult=argument, though.
From Alex:
@Rhology No, I think that was an insult. Here's another, you believe nonsense and are a credulous moron. And now you're blocked.
From me:
@theealex you're blocked>>LOL! From your own blog: "Feel free to write what you want, I don't moderate, delete, or ban...often". Guess not.
In between somewhere, I left the following comment on his blog:
Since you had the courtesy to visit my blog and then fling a cheap insult my way, I thought I'd go ahead and return the former favor (but forego the latter).
I'd like to ask you about this statement, which you repeated quite a bit when you were on with SyeTenB and @erichovind; that is, you expressed moral outrage several times.
It is insulting in the extreme to have someone else claim to know what you think
So what? Is it a morally bad thing to insult someone?
I'd like to know how you know that.
Also, you said something that's unintentionally funny:
In fact, the ONLY way you could possible know what I'm thinking and what I do and do not believe would be if you were omniscient.
Pair that up with:
I do not believe in ANY of the 4000+ gods mankind has invented during his time
...and we have the makings of a serious irony vortex.
For one thing, it is unbelievably bizarre to me how Sye could tell you at least twice on the show that we're not claiming all knowledge but rather to know someone who does have all knowledge, and you still don't want to take that into account. That says something about your willingness to be honest.
Hmmm, what do we call someone who's not honest? Oh yes, you helpfully provided some colorful verbiage: hollow, lying, charlatan.
Also, you claim to know that mankind invented these gods. To repeat (again) what Eric said to you, how do you know mankind invented them? Wouldn't that require omniscience on your part?
And don't retreat, I beg you, to the tired move-the-goalposts-quick canard of "what I mean is I haven't seen any evidence of any of those gods". That also requires omniscience, for there are many things that evidence things you (and the rest of mankind) don't yet understand. To claim knowledge that none of those things are evidence for a god (since that would mean you'd know all the things for which the things you observe are evidence) would thus require omniscience.
You also haven't seen any evidence that evidence is a good way to discover truth (EGW). So, since you believe EGW without evidence for that assertion, isn't that blind faith?
And if you believe in EGW and think you know it to be true, why do you violate EGW in that most fundamentally important of cases?
So, you'll have to come up with something else. I'd very much like to see you back up your harsh polemic with something other than mocking laughter. You sounded like a fool on the radio. Perhaps you're better in writing.
Peace,
Rhology
Alex responded to the comment with a new post:
Really? That's a novel take on the chronology of what actually happened, isn't it?
Oh, not really.
Maybe Alex means that he FIRST flung the insult and THEN visited my blog. I'm not sure how that fits in with his knowing I'm YEC, though...
Not going to mention the fact that you popped up, uninvited, in my Twitter feed?
Oh no35!!!!!!1
Does Alex not realise that public Twitter feeds are just that - public? Is he aware that Twitter has an option to make Twitter feeds private?
If so, why is he complaining? He's the one who followed SyeTenB around and showed up -uninvited- where Sye had been.
I'd asked: Is it a morally bad thing to insult someone?
I think the best thing to do at this point is refer you to your own Bible
Alex still doesn't get TAG.
Alex doesn't believe the Bible is true, so I'm asking based on his own grounds why it would be morally bad to insult someone. Hopefully he'll realise his error and actually answer the question.
Seems that your own god has a bit of a problem with insulting people
1) Same question - he still needs to prove it's a morally bad thing to insult people.
2) Alex is also trying to delve into Christian theology, and if he's anything like 99% of atheists I've encountered, he has no idea what he's doing.
This instance is no different. Perhaps Alex can tell us why, given Christian presuppositions, God "insulting" someone is a bad thing. And what it means when God gives His thoughts about someone, given that He is the omniscient creator and they are a rebellious creature.
I find it offensive that you belittle me (and everyone else who doesn't agree with your transcendental bullshit) by claiming that we hold a view that I can assure you we do not
So?
Maybe it will be helpful if I explain it differently. In 200 years, a mere eyeblink, an infinitesimally small fraction of time given the age of the universe (according to Alex's thoughts), we will all be dead, and so will our children and grandchildren. Who will remember GreatGrandpa Rhology and GreatGrandpa Alex?
So what? We are collections of atoms banging around, and the chemical reactions in my brain caused me to think that Alex knows the God of the Bible exists but suppresses the truth in unrighteousness. So, is there some moral quality here I'm missing? Atoms SHOULD act differently toward each other than they do? Based on what?
I'd asked: I'd like to know how you know that.
I'd like to know how YOU know that, without recourse to your viciously circular TAG....
Here we go again. Alex cannot answer questions. He's addicted to avoiding them. It's maddening to watch, really, but more pathetic than anything.
I'd said: For one thing, it is unbelievably bizarre to me how Sye could tell you at least twice on the show that we're not claiming all knowledge but rather to know someone who does have all knowledge, and you still don't want to take that into account. That says something about your willingness to be honest.
Are you sure? Because you're claiming to know an invisible super being who sacrificed himself to himself after knocking his own mother up so she could give birth to himself, who then decided that the only way to remove the 'sin' that he'd created (being the source of everything) was to 'die' for a mere three days as some kind of symbol....have I got anything wrong? You claim to know this individual, right? And you don't think this is wholly ridiculous?
Again, he gives no answer to his misrepresentation. No indication that he'll correct himself in the future. No apology for the strawman. He doesn't seem to care about rational dialogue.
I'd said:
Also, you claim to know that mankind invented these gods. To repeat (again) what Eric said to you, how do you know mankind invented them? Wouldn't that require omniscience on your part?
Do you believe that all those gods are real? If not, why not?
1) Alex could stand to read a bit more outside his own circle.
2) Also, this doesn't answer the question. Again.
I'd said:
To claim knowledge that none of those things are evidence for a god (since that would mean you'd know all the things for which the things you observe are evidence) would thus require omniscience.
And there's the rub. YOU want to claim to have access to knowledge that the rest of us don't have,
Actually, so is Alex! He's claiming to know that it's unreasonable that God exists, whereas I claim to know that it's reasonable that God exists. Alex again demonstrates his cluelessness.
I'd said:
And if you believe in EGW and think you know it to be true, why do you violate EGW in that most fundamentally important of cases?
Yawn, this is just the same, tired old bullshit, that Sye churns out.
Yet another unanswered question.
Here's an idea, why don't YOU come back with an argument that isn't dependent on circular reasoning and wish thinking?
Does he mean like the what I just reminded him about asking for evidence that evidence is a good way to discover truth?
Why doesn't he just answer the question? The most immediate conclusion that jumps to mind is that he can't.
I would be grateful if you don't bother returning.
Clearly Alex let his emotions get the better of him here. The inability to answer so many important questions will take a toll on anyone's good mood.
The boorish, mocking behavior of the atheists combined with their stubborn refusal to answer even basic questions and their numerous pathetic tu quoques really served to raise my blood pressure by several percentage points while listening to it, so it's great road fuel.
I decided to let Alex Botten know about that.
@theealex Just wanted you to hear from a listener. @erichovind and SyeTenB wrecked your position. #podcast #fundamentallyflawed
@theealex Oh, and you and your friends were among the rudest and most closed-minded atheists I've encountered. Cheers! @erichovind
Then, from Alex:
@Rhology really? You think that? Well, thanks for taking the time out of your busy day to tell me! Sye and Eric don't have an argument tbh
From me:
@theealex It's so funny you mention that, b/c while I heard a lot of "we sense what we sense" from you, I heard quite a bit of argumentation
@theealex ...from Sye and @erichovind.
From Alex:
@Rhology ahahaha! Just looked at your blog! You're a YEC??? Come on! You may as well tattoo 'idiot' on your forehead
From me:
@theealex tattoo 'idiot' on your forehead>>Oooh, someone's ignorant of scientific antirealism! Maybe you think insult=argument, though.
From Alex:
@Rhology No, I think that was an insult. Here's another, you believe nonsense and are a credulous moron. And now you're blocked.
From me:
@theealex you're blocked>>LOL! From your own blog: "Feel free to write what you want, I don't moderate, delete, or ban...often". Guess not.
In between somewhere, I left the following comment on his blog:
Since you had the courtesy to visit my blog and then fling a cheap insult my way, I thought I'd go ahead and return the former favor (but forego the latter).
I'd like to ask you about this statement, which you repeated quite a bit when you were on with SyeTenB and @erichovind; that is, you expressed moral outrage several times.
It is insulting in the extreme to have someone else claim to know what you think
So what? Is it a morally bad thing to insult someone?
I'd like to know how you know that.
Also, you said something that's unintentionally funny:
In fact, the ONLY way you could possible know what I'm thinking and what I do and do not believe would be if you were omniscient.
Pair that up with:
I do not believe in ANY of the 4000+ gods mankind has invented during his time
...and we have the makings of a serious irony vortex.
For one thing, it is unbelievably bizarre to me how Sye could tell you at least twice on the show that we're not claiming all knowledge but rather to know someone who does have all knowledge, and you still don't want to take that into account. That says something about your willingness to be honest.
Hmmm, what do we call someone who's not honest? Oh yes, you helpfully provided some colorful verbiage: hollow, lying, charlatan.
Also, you claim to know that mankind invented these gods. To repeat (again) what Eric said to you, how do you know mankind invented them? Wouldn't that require omniscience on your part?
And don't retreat, I beg you, to the tired move-the-goalposts-quick canard of "what I mean is I haven't seen any evidence of any of those gods". That also requires omniscience, for there are many things that evidence things you (and the rest of mankind) don't yet understand. To claim knowledge that none of those things are evidence for a god (since that would mean you'd know all the things for which the things you observe are evidence) would thus require omniscience.
You also haven't seen any evidence that evidence is a good way to discover truth (EGW). So, since you believe EGW without evidence for that assertion, isn't that blind faith?
And if you believe in EGW and think you know it to be true, why do you violate EGW in that most fundamentally important of cases?
So, you'll have to come up with something else. I'd very much like to see you back up your harsh polemic with something other than mocking laughter. You sounded like a fool on the radio. Perhaps you're better in writing.
Peace,
Rhology
Alex responded to the comment with a new post:
Really? That's a novel take on the chronology of what actually happened, isn't it?
Oh, not really.
Maybe Alex means that he FIRST flung the insult and THEN visited my blog. I'm not sure how that fits in with his knowing I'm YEC, though...
Not going to mention the fact that you popped up, uninvited, in my Twitter feed?
Oh no35!!!!!!1
Does Alex not realise that public Twitter feeds are just that - public? Is he aware that Twitter has an option to make Twitter feeds private?
If so, why is he complaining? He's the one who followed SyeTenB around and showed up -uninvited- where Sye had been.
I'd asked: Is it a morally bad thing to insult someone?
I think the best thing to do at this point is refer you to your own Bible
Alex still doesn't get TAG.
Alex doesn't believe the Bible is true, so I'm asking based on his own grounds why it would be morally bad to insult someone. Hopefully he'll realise his error and actually answer the question.
Seems that your own god has a bit of a problem with insulting people
1) Same question - he still needs to prove it's a morally bad thing to insult people.
2) Alex is also trying to delve into Christian theology, and if he's anything like 99% of atheists I've encountered, he has no idea what he's doing.
This instance is no different. Perhaps Alex can tell us why, given Christian presuppositions, God "insulting" someone is a bad thing. And what it means when God gives His thoughts about someone, given that He is the omniscient creator and they are a rebellious creature.
I find it offensive that you belittle me (and everyone else who doesn't agree with your transcendental bullshit) by claiming that we hold a view that I can assure you we do not
So?
Maybe it will be helpful if I explain it differently. In 200 years, a mere eyeblink, an infinitesimally small fraction of time given the age of the universe (according to Alex's thoughts), we will all be dead, and so will our children and grandchildren. Who will remember GreatGrandpa Rhology and GreatGrandpa Alex?
So what? We are collections of atoms banging around, and the chemical reactions in my brain caused me to think that Alex knows the God of the Bible exists but suppresses the truth in unrighteousness. So, is there some moral quality here I'm missing? Atoms SHOULD act differently toward each other than they do? Based on what?
I'd asked: I'd like to know how you know that.
I'd like to know how YOU know that, without recourse to your viciously circular TAG....
Here we go again. Alex cannot answer questions. He's addicted to avoiding them. It's maddening to watch, really, but more pathetic than anything.
I'd said: For one thing, it is unbelievably bizarre to me how Sye could tell you at least twice on the show that we're not claiming all knowledge but rather to know someone who does have all knowledge, and you still don't want to take that into account. That says something about your willingness to be honest.
Are you sure? Because you're claiming to know an invisible super being who sacrificed himself to himself after knocking his own mother up so she could give birth to himself, who then decided that the only way to remove the 'sin' that he'd created (being the source of everything) was to 'die' for a mere three days as some kind of symbol....have I got anything wrong? You claim to know this individual, right? And you don't think this is wholly ridiculous?
Again, he gives no answer to his misrepresentation. No indication that he'll correct himself in the future. No apology for the strawman. He doesn't seem to care about rational dialogue.
I'd said:
Also, you claim to know that mankind invented these gods. To repeat (again) what Eric said to you, how do you know mankind invented them? Wouldn't that require omniscience on your part?
Do you believe that all those gods are real? If not, why not?
1) Alex could stand to read a bit more outside his own circle.
2) Also, this doesn't answer the question. Again.
I'd said:
To claim knowledge that none of those things are evidence for a god (since that would mean you'd know all the things for which the things you observe are evidence) would thus require omniscience.
And there's the rub. YOU want to claim to have access to knowledge that the rest of us don't have,
Actually, so is Alex! He's claiming to know that it's unreasonable that God exists, whereas I claim to know that it's reasonable that God exists. Alex again demonstrates his cluelessness.
I'd said:
And if you believe in EGW and think you know it to be true, why do you violate EGW in that most fundamentally important of cases?
Yawn, this is just the same, tired old bullshit, that Sye churns out.
Yet another unanswered question.
Here's an idea, why don't YOU come back with an argument that isn't dependent on circular reasoning and wish thinking?
Does he mean like the what I just reminded him about asking for evidence that evidence is a good way to discover truth?
Why doesn't he just answer the question? The most immediate conclusion that jumps to mind is that he can't.
I would be grateful if you don't bother returning.
Clearly Alex let his emotions get the better of him here. The inability to answer so many important questions will take a toll on anyone's good mood.
Tuesday, October 04, 2011
Intra-Christendom views
The original version is funny.
I sent it over to David Bryan and he added the Orthodox column and row, and it is even better!
I sent it over to David Bryan and he added the Orthodox column and row, and it is even better!
