Originally posted by twhiteheadIt is you that thinks he is a god by being so presumptuous. I am not upset at all. I am quite calm. You can simply reread your own statements and see for yourself how you contradicted yourself. I'm not going to do it for you.
Now you think you are God? Or are you just incapable of understanding what I write?
I know the thread title upset you really badly, but please try and calm down and try to read a persons post before you respond.
17 May 15
Originally posted by josephwDid you watch the video by Richard Charier for which there is a link in the OP?
It is you that thinks he is a god by being so presumptuous. I am not upset at all. I am quite calm. You can simply reread your own statements and see for yourself how you contradicted yourself. I'm not going to do it for you.
Originally posted by wolfgang59God has appeared and will appear again, and unless you can prove otherwise that "God's Word" isn't God's Word and not mine, it remains anyone's word against God's when anyone contradicts what God has spoken.
Until God appears and says the same stuff as you it's your word against twhitehead's.
But of course that makes no sense to you since you deny the existence of God.
Originally posted by FMFWhat does that have to do with the post you are replying to? Nothing? You must be trying to obfuscate the subject of discussion again.
Did you watch the video by Richard Charier for which there is a link in the OP?
It is mindless gibberish to question the validity of the existence of the historical person of Jesus Christ. What is relevant to the discussion of the existence of Jesus is who He said He is, not whether or not there is historical evidence for His existence.
Originally posted by josephwThe video by Richard Charier, for which there is a link in the OP, is the topic of this thread. It is the subject of this discussion. Have you watched it?
What does that have to do with the post you are replying to? Nothing? You must be trying to obfuscate the subject of discussion again.
Originally posted by josephwSo when you attempt to mind read and claim: "Your respons to that shows how much you dislike the truth. ", it is God speaking.
It is you that thinks he is a god by being so presumptuous.
When I do the same in return I think I am a god and am being presumptuous?
I am not upset at all.
Your behaviour says otherwise.
You can simply reread your own statements and see for yourself how you contradicted yourself. I'm not going to do it for you.
So, you claim I contradicted my self, but cannot substantiate it?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
17 May 15
Originally posted by josephwYou are trying [and failing] to shift the burden of proof.
God has appeared and will appear again, and unless you can prove otherwise that "God's Word" isn't God's Word and not mine, it remains anyone's word against God's when anyone contradicts what God has spoken.
But of course that makes no sense to you since you deny the existence of God.
YOU are making the positive claim that god exists, and that he has said stuff, and that you know what he has said.
YOU are therefore the one who needs to back that up with sufficient evidence to justify believing that claim.
Neither you, nor anybody else, has EVER met such a burden of proof, and thus we don't accept that what you say
has been demonstrated as true.
17 May 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadI dunno, we constantly have to deal with ignoramuses who debate God without reading the Bible, so why not argue the video without seeing it?
Given the above, don't even bother responding to the thread if you aren't prepared to watch the youtube video first.
Isn't that the norm in this forum? Arguing from ignorance?
17 May 15
Originally posted by googlefudgeThat is your free will speaking, and you are free to do so.
Neither you, nor anybody else, has EVER met such a burden of proof, and thus we don't accept that what you say has been demonstrated as true.
Much as we do not accept what those blaspheming God say as true, either.
There is no proof for, nor against, so it is faith making the determination. And you have not met such a burden of faith. So don't blame us for not taking your word on it.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
17 May 15
Originally posted by SuzianneMostly from your side of the debate.
I dunno, we constantly have to deal with ignoramuses who debate God without reading the Bible, so why not argue the video without seeing it?
Isn't that the norm in this forum? Arguing from ignorance?
However, If I want to know what your religion says about a topic, it would make sense to go read
what it says [if anything] in the bible...
Except that if I go and read the bible and take what it says at face value. I will find that almost none
of you Christians will actually believe what it actually says. Because it has to be 'interpreted'.
So reading the bible is less helpful than it would first appear.
So, maybe I want to know if your religion is true and your god exists... Well now I need evidence
that your religion is true and that your god exists, and the bible isn't evidence for the claims in
the bible. External evidence is needed, and none exists.
Of course, yours is not the only religion. And the bible is not the only holy book.
[How many other religions holy books have you read btw?]
That's a lot of reading of generally very boring books, often times which need al sorts of properly sourced
and researched commentaries to make sense of them by placing them in their proper historical context.
Giving you even more reading to do.
So here's a plan. I will read in full, with all relevant commentaries, the holy book of whichever religion/s can
actually demonstrate that their beliefs [and, if relevant, god/s] are true and actually real.
Till then I will read books that are actually interesting and/or informative.
17 May 15
Originally posted by googlefudgeSo not only will you continue to wallow in your ignorance but you will take pride in doing so.
So here's a plan. I will read in full, with all relevant commentaries, the holy book of whichever religion/s can actually demonstrate that their beliefs [and, if relevant, god/s] are true and actually real.
Till then I will read books that are actually interesting and/or informative.
Check.
Originally posted by SuzianneThe Bible, isn't God. It is perfectly legitimate to debate topics about God without reading the Bible. If you wished to debate particular verses of the Bible then yes, it makes perfect sense to demand that people read the verses first.
I dunno, we constantly have to deal with ignoramuses who debate God without reading the Bible, so why not argue the video without seeing it?
Isn't that the norm in this forum? Arguing from ignorance?
It may be the norm, but that doesn't make it right.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
17 May 15
Originally posted by Suzianne
That is your free will speaking, and you are free to do so.
Much as we do not accept what those blaspheming God say as true, either.
There is no proof for, nor against, so it is faith making the determination. And you have not met such a burden of faith. So don't blame us for not taking your word on it.
That is your free will speaking, and you are free to do so.
There is no such thing as free will. And the free will you require and talk about is logically incoherent.
There is no proof for, nor against, so it is faith making the determination.
Faith is utterly and completely useless for determining truth.
It has precisely ZERO power for predicting what is or is not true, and has an abysmal track record of
getting everything wrong and halting reasoned enquiry.
Every other believer of every other religion has faith as the ultimate justification for their beliefs and
they are ALL wrong.
That simple fact on it's own is proof that faith does not and cannot work.
IF you have a proposition for which there is no evidence to justify belief either way then the only valid
position is to LACK belief either way. There is no justification to just pretend that you have a justification
to believe whatever it is that you WANT to believe is true. Which is all you are doing by saying that you
believe by faith. You WANT this to be true. And thus will keep believing it to be true despite a total lack
of evidence that it is true, AND mountains of evidence that it is in fact false.
Some if which you would find if you were to read Richard Carrier's Books.
Of course I will blame you for choosing to use faith as a means of determining fact from fiction because it's
utterly idiotic and intellectually bankrupt to do so.
If you keep using to use a system for forming beliefs despite the fact that it's been proven not to work from
both a theoretical and practical standpoint when a vastly better system that has been proven to work exists
and is known to you then it is absolutely your fault when you believe things that are demonstrably untrue or
unjustified.
And when those untrue and unjustified things include beliefs that directly and deeply impact your world view
and moral foundations then that is absolutely of concern to anyone and everyone else.