tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post116907250341732578..comments2023-12-01T18:05:24.875-05:00Comments on Debunking Christianity: You Can't Argue With ChristiansUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger111125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-45125977647826483792012-11-28T19:11:51.415-05:002012-11-28T19:11:51.415-05:00I wonder how many aethiests have never seen a neut...I wonder how many aethiests have never seen a neutron, but accept it on blind faith that they exist...<br />Everybody believes in something; Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in the same God, and aethiests believe in themselves alone. This post is not intended to be insulting to anybody. We should all stop making assumptions and passing judgement upon others based upon those assumptions. There is no superior belief system; we're all just people who need to quit beating up on other people. Live and let live... Anyone agree?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-33139488230693359532012-04-17T01:44:46.048-04:002012-04-17T01:44:46.048-04:00There was a point in my life where I came to my ow...There was a point in my life where I came to my own conclusion that there is no god or higher being even when my family was deeply rooted in christianity for many generetions, I think I got tired of all of it, bible verses, prayers, the so called worship songs was a broken recordat home, then my mother started having prayer nights, I remember that all this got me so angry, some times I ridiculed them and made fun of them. Then my mothers friend said she had a vision that I was going to suffer an accident and was going to loose my life, she said according to her vision "God " was alloing this to happen because that was the only way for me to come to believe and because "he" had a planin my life to use me for his glory; to make a long story short everything she said happened to me. I fell from a second floor head down, burst my head open, died at the hospital, after half hour doctors gave up and told my mother to start funeral arragements, they even allowed my family to go to the surgery room, many of my uncles and ants were there and one of my grammas. They made a big circle together with the nurses and doctors and prayed, then my mother crying asked the doctor to try cpr again and i'm back. I stayed at the hospital for one month and even dough when all this happend I was in comma or dead, the doctors and the nurses kept telling the story and how amazed they were about it, my family was thankful to God, and I came to believe, not only because of that but because another person from another church had a dream about my accident too before it happened I just didn't believed at that time, few years later I moved to nyc [all this took place in Dominican Republic] and was met by disciples of christ and became one, since then I was healed from sickness, had dreams and visions too vizzared to explain. In conclusion there's not doubt in me that there is a God not because of what I been taught but because of real life experiences, and in fact I don't have any reason to lie or to try to convince anybody about this. But one thing is sure for me no matter what people say He has been real in my lif, as real as my 16 stiches mark on my head and tinnitus ringging in my left ear to remind me for the rest of my life. I weite this not to convince you that there is a God, no, my point is to tell you don't give oppinions about what you don't know nothing about. In my view there is nothing deboked here. Just personal oppinions and we all have to respect that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-34215268107855824812010-10-11T22:57:45.697-04:002010-10-11T22:57:45.697-04:00Dont want to rely on faith, completely understanda...Dont want to rely on faith, completely understandable. But have u looked & heard about the facts?!?!?<br /> Did you know there are over 24,000 original manuscripts of the bible? Dating alll the way back to 300 A.D. Many non-christians try to argue saying the bibles been changed & its unreliable but yet the orginial manuscripts show the bible has remained completely the same!!!<br />The Iliad has 764 lines of textual corruption whereas the New Testament only has 40 lines of textual corruption. And most of the textual corruptions found in the new testament were spelling errors or grammer errors.<br /><br />Josh Mcdowell wrote a book called Evidence that demans a verdit and I highly recomment ant skeptics out there to read it.Alina Mariehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02314677686343725102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-18138233500579580082010-09-16T16:44:58.731-04:002010-09-16T16:44:58.731-04:00And regarding that other idea I see in this thread...And regarding that other idea I see in this thread (which I also used to buy) that belief can do no harm if it happens to be wrong because one will have have lived a good, loving life: The horror of indoctrinating a child with an idea s/he then has to use mental gymnastics to deal with and/or be otherwise traumatized by, the horror of eternal torture for her/himself or those around her/him who fail to internalize the story, the "Emperor's New Clothes" aspect of the whole thing....nope, not good, kind, or loving. Not a life of no regrets if it turns out to have been false. (And, btw, eternal damnation trumps all the horrors of the OT) A kind and good life could be much better lived without all of this. No Christian who believes in damnation can truthfully make the kind loving life claim. I know they would speak of free choice, but what one is able to think/believe is conditional on everything from personality to intellect to emotion to culture to chemical reaction,... If a person with brain damage will not be damned for losing belief after his head is hit, why would a person whose head is never in the first place of the proper condition to be able to " choose belief" be damned?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-26554012170286607742010-09-16T16:02:46.648-04:002010-09-16T16:02:46.648-04:00Maybe this should be a new thread. Maybe it shoul...Maybe this should be a new thread. Maybe it shouldn't be published at all.<br /> <br />Pained because I previously held many of the views I see posted by Christians here, I have a tragic level of understanding of the strength of the blinders involved. I nearly died in my change of thought, a change that I think could not have happened to me if not for my children, and from which I believe I will never truly "recover." Because I began to see in new ways only after 45 years of a deeply Christian life (was even a BSF leader by my crash year), my shame, my regrets, and my cognitive dissonance are greater than I can put into words.<br /> One thing that strikes me now is the phenomenon of Christians placing themselves in a "different" category (as I did also) based on the idea that they are not that "wrong" kind of "religious," superstitious, fundamentalist, judgemental, unscientific, (etc, etc) believer. I even see some joke, for instance chuckling about those who, "see Satan behind every bush." Is there some difference between seeing one or a few versus many? Is believing in one supernatural story (often in the New Testament) somehow rational because one doesn't take others (often in the Old Testament) literally? Is there some line at which faith is laughable or wrong-minded and another at which it is admirable, rational, intelligent? How? Why? <br />I always did struggle with the idea of "liberal believers," wondering at what point this becomes no different from not believing at all. Now I see the opposite difficulty, wondering how different it is from believing everything/anything. I do see that it is less dangerous in the short run, but is it not possibly more dangerous in the long run, keeping the whole thing going by the concept that there is a sane, admirable way to believe a supernatural story?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-72018746331143312010-09-13T23:13:11.578-04:002010-09-13T23:13:11.578-04:00Damn!
Now I gotta go read the response...
See wh...Damn!<br /><br />Now I gotta go read the response...<br /><br />See what you did?GearHedEdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288513835630145996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-24315126286264858462010-09-13T20:10:56.894-04:002010-09-13T20:10:56.894-04:00GearHedEd
Do I have the dubious honor of being th...GearHedEd<br /><br /><i>Do I have the dubious honor of being the very firstperson to comment on any of your posts?</i><br />affirmative. thanks for the comment. i have provided a response<br /><br /><i>LOL...</i><br />gotta start somewhere<br /><br /><i>Apparently you feel Loftus threatens your conception of Christianity</i><br />not at all. i just don't want readers here to think that loftus' misconceptions of christianity are accurate.<br /><br /><i>otherwise why devote months to a blog that no one reads, and no one comments on?</i><br />first, people do read it. they just haven't commented. second, i'm writing because i enjoy writing. third, my purpose is to provide an alternative to loftus' mischaracterizations.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-58593315194554783652010-09-10T19:04:05.093-04:002010-09-10T19:04:05.093-04:00trae:
Do I have the dubious honor of being the ve...trae:<br /><br />Do I have the dubious honor of being the very firstperson to comment on any of your posts?<br /><br />LOL...<br /><br />Apparently you feel Loftus threatens your conception of Christianity, otherwise why devote months to a blog that no one reads, and no one comments on?<br /><br />You still got nothing.GearHedEdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288513835630145996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-19623510636714763492010-09-08T22:37:00.141-04:002010-09-08T22:37:00.141-04:00pink monkey
so your keeping up a blog for one mon...pink monkey<br /><br /><i>so your keeping up a blog for one month is supposed to equate to years of study from John under renowned apologists?</i><br />How do you know I haven’t done the same or something similar? You don’t.<br /><br /><i>As far as your link, I followed it for as much as I could take.</i><br />This response is apropos for this thread. Nontheists are the ones who already have their minds made up. they can’t be reasoned with and won’t dialogue on the issues. kudos to mr. Loftus for writing books but, look through this blog. You don’t see dialogue. You don’t see Loftus engaging on his conclusions. He doesn’t subject his beliefs to debate that I’ve seen. Neither he nor any of his 400+ followers have bothered to engage my blog posts even once. Nontheists are supposed to be intellectually superior. Surely at least one person here can show me the error of my ways.<br /><br /><i>How can you judge what information is sufficient to persuade each of us of the truth? Apparently you know what all of us consider sufficient evidence[or god has no intention of saving us all...or even offering the chance]?</i><br />I’m not sure which one of my comments you are referring to but, the real question is why nontheists think they can substantiate that there is no God.<br /><br /><i>And what's wrong w/ intellectual information.</i><br />Nothing that I’m aware of.<br /><br /><i>How can more of the truth hurt anything?</i><br />The issue isn’t truth. The issue is the claim by nontheists that they don’t have enough “evidence”. The problem isn’t evidence but, the worldview from which the claim originates which is nontheism. How can the claim have any validity when the person is operating from a worldview they can’t substantiate in the first place?<br /><br /><i>And what about Thomas? He wasn't condemned for asking for a little more evidence than it took others, he was still shown what the good lord knew he needed so that he would believe.</i><br />What evidence is there that Thomas was an atheist until he met the risen Jesus?<br /><br /><i>Just how in hell do you think you can speak for Mr. Loftus' former belief, or lack there of?</i><br />I stated my case in the first blog post. Instead of dealing with my points, you are just committing the genetic fallacy.<br /><br /><i>It's evident by John's actions that he was a believer[you could also read WIBA for comprehension], and that he followed a "calling", something you criticize him for but continue to shirk yourself.</i><br />Judging from what I posted in my first post, I would say that it’s not “evident” that he was a believer. I made a concise case. If you disagree, tell me where I went wrong.<br /><br /><i>It's not a duck or a dodge, he's just had his fill of idiocy for the time being.</i><br />whatever<br /><br /><i>It's not effective to make a name for yourself by detracting others.</i><br />I haven’t once called mr. loftus any names or committed an ad hominem with him. I’ve only dealt with the ideas he presents in his book and pointed out that he’s not willing to engage on them.<br /><br /><i>You're one of JP Holding's lil kid buddies</i><br />I don’t know that person.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-15018404216705579252010-09-08T19:29:46.651-04:002010-09-08T19:29:46.651-04:00so your keeping up a blog for one month is suppose...<i>so your keeping up a blog for one month is supposed to equate to years of study from John under renowned apologists?</i><br />How do you know I haven’t done the same or something similar? You don’t.<br /><br /><i>As far as your link, I followed it for as much as I could take.</i><br />This response is apropos for this thread. Nontheists are the ones who already have their minds made up. they can’t be reasoned with and won’t dialogue on the issues. kudos to mr. Loftus for writing books but, look through this blog. You don’t see dialogue. You don’t see Loftus engaging on his conclusions. He doesn’t subject his beliefs to debate that I’ve seen. Neither he nor any of his 400+ followers have bothered to engage my blog posts even once. Nontheists are supposed to be intellectually superior. Surely at least one person here can show me the error of my ways.<br /><br /><i>How can you judge what information is sufficient to persuade each of us of the truth? Apparently you know what all of us consider sufficient evidence[or god has no intention of saving us all...or even offering the chance]?</i><br />I’m not sure which one of my comments you are referring to but, the real question is why nontheists think they can substantiate that there is no God.<br /><br /><i>And what's wrong w/ intellectual information.</i><br />Nothing that I’m aware of.<br /><br /><i>How can more of the truth hurt anything?</i><br />The issue isn’t truth. The issue is the claim by nontheists that they don’t have enough “evidence”. The problem isn’t evidence but, the worldview from which the claim originates which is nontheism. How can the claim have any validity when the person is operating from a worldview they can’t substantiate in the first place?<br /><br /><i>And what about Thomas? He wasn't condemned for asking for a little more evidence than it took others, he was still shown what the good lord knew he needed so that he would believe.</i><br />What evidence is there that Thomas was an atheist until he met the risen Jesus?<br /><br /><i>Just how in hell do you think you can speak for Mr. Loftus' former belief, or lack there of?</i><br />I stated my case in the first blog post. Instead of dealing with my points, you are just committing the genetic fallacy.<br /><br /><i>It's evident by John's actions that he was a believer[you could also read WIBA for comprehension], and that he followed a "calling", something you criticize him for but continue to shirk yourself.</i><br />Judging from what I posted in my first post, I would say that it’s not “evident” that he was a believer. I made a concise case. If you disagree, tell me where I went wrong.<br /><br /><i>It's not a duck or a dodge, he's just had his fill of idiocy for the time being.</i><br />whatever<br /><br /><i>It's not effective to make a name for yourself by detracting others.</i><br />I haven’t once called mr. loftus any names or committed an ad hominem with him. I’ve only dealt with the ideas he presents in his book and pointed out that he’s not willing to engage on them.<br /><br /><i>You're one of JP Holding's lil kid buddies</i><br />I don’t know that person.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-52869668337215563062010-09-08T19:21:45.549-04:002010-09-08T19:21:45.549-04:00pink monkey
so your keeping up a blog for one mon...pink monkey<br /><br /><i>so your keeping up a blog for one month is supposed to equate to years of study from John under renowned apologists?</i><br />How do you know I haven’t done the same or something similar? You don’t.<br /><br /><i>As far as your link, I followed it for as much as I could take.</i><br />This response is apropos for this thread. Nontheists are the ones who already have their minds made up. they can’t be reasoned with and won’t dialogue on the issues. kudos to mr. Loftus for writing books but, look through this blog. You don’t see dialogue. You don’t see Loftus engaging on his conclusions. He doesn’t subject his beliefs to debate that I’ve seen. Neither he nor any of his 400+ followers have bothered to engage my blog posts even once. Nontheists are supposed to be intellectually superior. Surely at least one person here can show me the error of my ways.<br /><br /><i>How can you judge what information is sufficient to persuade each of us of the truth? Apparently you know what all of us consider sufficient evidence[or god has no intention of saving us all...or even offering the chance]?</i><br />I’m not sure which one of my comments you are referring to but, the real question is why nontheists think they can substantiate that there is no God.<br /><br /><i>And what's wrong w/ intellectual information.</i><br />Nothing that I’m aware of.<br /><br /><i>How can more of the truth hurt anything?</i><br />The issue isn’t truth. The issue is the claim by nontheists that they don’t have enough “evidence”. The problem isn’t evidence but, the worldview from which the claim originates which is nontheism. How can the claim have any validity when the person is operating from a worldview they can’t substantiate in the first place?<br /><br /><i>And what about Thomas? He wasn't condemned for asking for a little more evidence than it took others, he was still shown what the good lord knew he needed so that he would believe.</i><br />What evidence is there that Thomas was an atheist until he met the risen Jesus?<br /><br /><i>Just how in hell do you think you can speak for Mr. Loftus' former belief, or lack there of?</i><br />I stated my case in the first blog post. Instead of dealing with my points, you are just committing the genetic fallacy.<br /><br /><i>It's evident by John's actions that he was a believer[you could also read WIBA for comprehension], and that he followed a "calling", something you criticize him for but continue to shirk yourself.</i><br />Judging from what I posted in my first post, I would say that it’s not “evident” that he was a believer. I made a concise case. If you disagree, tell me where I went wrong.<br /><br /><i>It's not a duck or a dodge, he's just had his fill of idiocy for the time being.</i><br />whatever<br /><br /><i>It's not effective to make a name for yourself by detracting others.</i><br />I haven’t once called mr. loftus any names or committed an ad hominem with him. I’ve only dealt with the ideas he presents in his book and pointed out that he’s not willing to engage on them.<br /><br /><i>You're one of JP Holding's lil kid buddies</i><br />I don’t know that person.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-5658339466583824282010-09-07T23:11:46.034-04:002010-09-07T23:11:46.034-04:00oh i get it now trae. You're one of JP Holding...oh i get it now trae. You're one of JP Holding's lil kid buddies that he attracts through comics and then indoctrinates[well I hope that's the worst of what he does].<br /><br />remember, it's not your fault.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18001056020421447516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-4291435579382703052010-09-07T23:01:46.224-04:002010-09-07T23:01:46.224-04:00lol trae, you're pretty funny.
so your keepin...lol trae, you're pretty funny.<br /><br />so your keeping up a blog for one month is supposed to equate to years of study from John under renowned apologists? He's a legitimate pastor, don't you want to put in the time? I hope you are joking. I get it though, fruits of the spirit right, that's not yours, and it wasn't your calling...weak.<br /><br />As far as your link, I followed it for as much as I could take. How can you judge what information is sufficient to persuade each of us of the truth? Apparently you know what all of us consider sufficient evidence[or god has no intention of saving us all...or even offering the chance]? We were made by him trae, he made each and everyone of us unique, like snowflakes, each one w/ their own systematics for belief. You believe this, don't you?<br /><br />And what's wrong w/ intellectual information, besides what's glaringly obvious to me. How can more of the truth hurt anything? How could anyone make a blanket statement that it can't transform lives? I thank the lord everyday for the intellectual information that I obtained, resulting in the transformation of my own life. And what about Thomas? He wasn't condemned for asking for a little more evidence than it took others, he was still shown what the good lord knew he needed so that he would believe.<br /><br />Now let me restate. Just how in hell do you think you can speak for Mr. Loftus' former belief, or lack there of? This is not an issue for me, really. I take men by their actions and words, but actions first. It's evident by John's actions that he was a believer[you could also read WIBA for comprehension], and that he followed a "calling", something you criticize him for but continue to shirk yourself. Grow a pair trae, God wouldn't need minions like yourself even if he did exist. Apparently you're fond of speaking for God though, so you tell me how he feels about all of us. Just keep in mind to look not at the speck in your brother's eye...no wait, only cast the first stone if you're perfect, wait..don't judge lest you be judged.<br /><br />And you wonder why John won't respond to you. Quit flattering yourself. It's not a duck or a dodge, he's just had his fill of idiocy for the time being. It's not effective to make a name for yourself by detracting others.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18001056020421447516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-6580761232834950452010-09-07T21:33:08.973-04:002010-09-07T21:33:08.973-04:00clamat
i respondedclamat<br /><br />i respondedtrae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-14578057404137848082010-09-07T20:04:14.988-04:002010-09-07T20:04:14.988-04:00@trae norsworthy
Just a follow up: Now that you&#...@trae norsworthy<br /><br />Just a follow up: Now that you've to Harry H. McCall’s previous posts, please do me the solid of responding to mine, in the “My Top Ten List of Christian Delusions” thread, posted on August 26 and 28. Thanks again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-57395421983068442962010-09-07T19:28:02.312-04:002010-09-07T19:28:02.312-04:00gearheded
Not a single real ANSWER there, because...gearheded<br /><br /><i>Not a single real ANSWER there, because there ARE none.</i><br />If by answer you mean explanation, then I provide plenty of them on my blog. Feel free to peruse it.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-33837855623352942032010-09-07T19:27:11.616-04:002010-09-07T19:27:11.616-04:00pink monkey
how the hell you guys rip John Loftus...pink monkey<br /><br /><i>how the hell you guys rip John Loftus for not ever being a Christian is well beyond me.</i><br />here's a reason<br /><br />http://thegdebate.blogspot.com/2010/07/l-11.html<br /><br /><i>What exactly have you done to put your money where your mouth is? I don't see John's level of dedication from you.</i><br />you are apparently unaware that a month ago, I started a blog dedicated to meeting the “debunking christianity challenge” and to specifically respond to the case made in wiba. I post almost every day and Mr. loftus is aware of it. he has yet to address it. he once hinted to thom stark that I am not worthy of his time so it seems that he should either retract the challenge or qualify it to the extent that he can escape whenever he feels like it. the closest he has come to a response is to ask hendy to respond as his proxy. So, when you ask about the level of dedication, know that your statement should be directed at an apparent hypocrisy by mr. loftus.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-55686987979479196812010-09-07T19:22:23.440-04:002010-09-07T19:22:23.440-04:00agent smith
To become a Christian, one has to sus...agent smith<br /><br /><i>To become a Christian, one has to suspend reason, logic and turn a blind eye on painfully obvious facts. </i><br />This is definitely not true and the Bible does not encourage people to be ignorant. I’ve quoted passages to Loftus and he never responds to them. yet, he continues to perpetuate the mischaracterization.<br /><br /><i>Thus, by definition, the Christian is unreasonable, irrational, illogical and impervious to facts.</i><br />since there have been brilliant atheists who became Christians after they “followed the evidence”, I would say that your conclusion does not reflect reality.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-74105074354115885692010-09-07T19:19:57.294-04:002010-09-07T19:19:57.294-04:00harry
RE: Post on 8 -19 (My Love Affair Is Over)
...harry<br /><br /><i>RE: Post on 8 -19 (My Love Affair Is Over)</i><br />Ok, thanks. I will go back over there and respond to any comments not covered here.<br /><br /><i>RE: Mark 9:1 & 2 Peter 3:4</i><br />I’m sure you’re aware that those passages do not necessarily mean that Jesus was returning within 2000 years. What does <i>parousia</i> mean to you?<br /><br /><i>RE: Mark 16: 17 – 18</i><br />Where does the Bible say that those actions are necessary for perpetuity?<br /><br /><i>RE: Context of the above discussion.</i><br />The reason why your question isn’t part of the context you are referring to is because you apparently aren’t aware that those types of actions are not needed in the same quantity post Jesus and His disciples nor does the Bible give any indication to the contrary.<br /><br /><i>what do you have to prove your point today other than faith? Let’s see your signs and wonders given to you by Jesus at work now!</i><br />“prove” is a broad term. Christianity is proven to individuals on the basis of God’s presence and outworking in their personal lives. there are many ways to reasonably “prove” (metaphysically, spiritually, philosophically) God’s presence and outworking on a corporate scale. In these forums, I focus on the dichotomy between theism and nontheism.<br /><br /><i>RE: The burden of proof is on the Christian community.</i><br />This is not a court of law. There is no “burden of proof” protocol. You believe what you want to believe.<br /><br /><i>The Bible tells me you Christians have hit miracle pay-dirt as promised by Jesus. So show me the gold!</i><br />http://thegdebate.blogspot.com/2010/08/l-35.html<br /><br /><i>Secondary, studies which followed Benny Hinn and other major healing evangelist showed…</i><br />This should tell you something about the nature of miracles<br /><br /><i>RE: Greek grammar is Greek grammar. Romans 10:13. The grammatical verbal syntax is basically the same as in John 14: 13 -14 as I asked you to exegete above.</i><br />You repeated precisely what I mentioned that we should not do; look at one passage to the exclusion of all the other relevant passages.<br /><br /><i>So salvation is a mental state of personal faith (subjective and un-provable).</i><br />Not exactly. You would have to prove that God does not work in the world in order to substantiate that conclusion.trae norsworthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879498882233989365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-76391653739135053782010-09-03T21:37:51.193-04:002010-09-03T21:37:51.193-04:00Notice that trae answered EVERY question with a qu...Notice that trae answered EVERY question with a question?<br /><br />Not a single real ANSWER there, because there ARE none.GearHedEdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288513835630145996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-83683647164893339752010-09-02T06:02:22.700-04:002010-09-02T06:02:22.700-04:00So even if a highly respected Christian was to ann...<i>So even if a highly respected Christian was to announce that they had opened their mind and came out as a atheist, you would automatically assume, by religious default, that they had never had any true belief in the religion?</i><br /><br />As I said, it's their ultimate defense mechanism.Jeff Eygeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11967707883565162538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-51790327244265762122010-09-01T21:08:55.738-04:002010-09-01T21:08:55.738-04:00Brad,
"Those who believe are saved. Those wh...Brad,<br /><br />"Those who believe are saved. Those who don't believe have never believed, and therefore have never had saving faith."<br /><br />So even if a highly respected Christian was to announce that they had opened their mind and came out as a atheist, you would automatically assume, by religious default, that they had never had any true belief in the religion?jaketheclaphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01404507130431135491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-68674441331581166162010-09-01T20:38:22.789-04:002010-09-01T20:38:22.789-04:00how the hell you guys rip John Loftus for not ever...how the hell you guys rip John Loftus for not ever being a Christian is well beyond me. To accuse a man of this that at one time dedicated his life to Christianity and can prove this by his various degrees is offensive. What exactly have you done to put your money where your mouth is? I don't see John's level of dedication from you. That means even you go to hell, you aren't following your book even that far.<br /><br />Ridiculous, rlly, look at yourselves. While you're at it plz re-read the no true scotsman fallacy. You're attempting to apply that to John. Guess what, that does not work. Burn in the hell of your creation [you fall short of a man of dedication by leaps and bounds and attempt to justify that], and thank me later when it doesn't exist. Too bad it'll be too late for you to realize that. You really do disgust me.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18001056020421447516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-17724546311028309812010-08-31T13:48:18.628-04:002010-08-31T13:48:18.628-04:00I've learned not to "debate" a Chris...I've learned not to "debate" a Christian a long time ago. You may think you have reason, logic and facts on your side. But those things mean nothing when you are dealing with the unreasonable and irrational. You may think that our little intellectual exercise was all for fun, think again. No matter how politely you present your facts and reason to the Christian, as long as it deviates from his or her understanding of the Bible and the world, the Christian will always treat it as an assualt on their God and religion. To become a Christian, one has to suspend reason, logic and turn a blind eye on painfully obvious facts. Thus, by definition, the Christian is unreasonable, irrational, illogical and impervious to facts.<br /><br />I once had a discussion about slavery with a fundie friend of mine. I quoted many Bible verses that supported slavery insomuch that precise rules on how to acquire and treat your slaves were pretty much spelled out. When I asked any thing Jesus said that condemns slavery, my fundie friend's response was "We will just have to agree to disagree on this". And that is when I saw the light and stopped wasting my time with him on anything intellectual.Agentsmithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03837513161489009408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-29597221283713205702010-08-31T13:15:00.239-04:002010-08-31T13:15:00.239-04:00@trae norsworthy
After you’ve responded to Harry ...@trae norsworthy<br /><br />After you’ve responded to Harry H. McCall’s previous posts, please do me the solid of responding to mine, in the “My Top Ten List of Christian Delusions” thread, posted on August 26 and 28. Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com