Bible Contradictions 2.0

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
361

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:<<< I didn’t miss your point. I actually understood it before you even said it. And what do you say to what I replied to it? Israel was Israel and the Church is the Church.[/quote]The church IS the Israel of God and the Israel of God IS the church. Always has been from all eternity and since the 12th of Genesis in time. When I get a chance I’ll check, but I’m betting the Septuagint even renders what can only be Israel by the word ekklesia which is translated church all over the NT. I can’t believe I never thought of that before. The learning goes on. Thank you Lord.

That’s a great illustration actually. There was the visible nation, of whom multitudes were regularly exterminated for a couple thousand years and the invisible remnant who actually knew the LORD. Those who had not bowed the knee to baal who’s number and members were visible only to God. Let me clarify something here. When we say “invisible”? We do not mean invisible people for Pete’s sake. We mean indiscernible to us. We don’t know who the actually elect or not are. That true mystical body is visible to God alone. All we can see is who makes the claim by their participation in the VISIBLE church which we CAN see.

I’ll get to you Chris. I have to go to work. It should be definitely instructive to the readers how foundationally irreconcilable are the minds of a true reformation protestant and informed Catholics. If that is brought out, I believe I will have ultimately glorified God in having participated in these discussions. Never the twain shall meet. Rome is the borg cube of Christendom. Open arms and brotherly kissy talk mean spiritual absorption and I will have none of it. Of course Chris will respond about how whether I’ll have it or not… it is, but that’s tough. Well actually he’ll say that all those like me can’t be absorbed because to be in Christ IS to be so by the grace of God dispensed through the papacy by definition, but that’s tough too.
[/quote]

Oh, you’re Jewish now? Ok, then. You going to Glorify God by ignoring questions and making bold fallacious proclamations? Ok, what ever floats your boat. I don’t think you can glorify God and tell falsehoods about other faiths at the same time, but that’s just me. I’ll take truth, thanks.

362

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Brother Chris

What’s with the G-d. Why can’t you spell it? Sorry I really don’t get that. Is it another funny little Catholic thingy?
[/quote]

No, it’s a funny Jewish thing. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy G-d in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Comes after Thou shalt worship the Lord thy G-d and Him only shalt thou serve. And, before Thou shalt keep the sabbath holy.[/quote]

How is discussing God taking his name in vain? And if it is taking it in vain how is putting a dash in place of the “o” not taking it in vain. You think he doesn’t know that you’ve replaced the “o” with a dash?

Just more stuff huh?
[/quote]

Blessed are the persecuted, I suppose.

It is not taking His name in vain, but if I don’t write it or say it then I can’t possibly take it in vain. Go ahead, go make fun of Jewbacca, as well. Jewbacca does the same thing, most Jews (which I was raised in a partial Jewish household) don’t write out G-d, or say His names.

Yes, more discipline. You going to make fun of me for doing charitable acts as well, “more stuff”? How about me praying the Pater Noster or the Ave Maria or the Rosary after supper? How about praying seven times a day? How about waking up at 0500 so I can do my Holy Hour before I start the day? Or, how about learning Latin? How about going to mass, is that just more “stuff”?

You have a problem with disciplines, fine don’t do them. But, what doctrines aren’t important, Zeb? What did G-d say that wasn’t important? Don’t be like Tirib and ignore the question.

363

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Brother Chris

What’s with the G-d. Why can’t you spell it? Sorry I really don’t get that. Is it another funny little Catholic thingy?
[/quote]

No, it’s a funny Jewish thing. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy G-d in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Comes after Thou shalt worship the Lord thy G-d and Him only shalt thou serve. And, before Thou shalt keep the sabbath holy.[/quote]

How is discussing God taking his name in vain? And if it is taking it in vain how is putting a dash in place of the “o” not taking it in vain. You think he doesn’t know that you’ve replaced the “o” with a dash?

Just more stuff huh?
[/quote]

“Stuff”. Nice way to put it. As if the omnipotent creator of the entire known and unknown universe has an objection to having his name (in fact, our name for him, not even “his” name) written. Yeah. That’s it. Couldn’t be man’s idea. [/quote]

Actually, He did give us His name. Like I told Zeb, go tell that to Jewbacca he does the same thing. I’m sure you wouldn’t because you don’t disrespect Jews like that because you’re afraid of being considered a bigot, but because I’m a Catholic, like a pig in mud, no problem being prejudice towards me being a Catholic.

364

Lies, lies, lies. What are you talking about? This is heresy of kind I have never seen.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…lies about being alive at Genesis 12, or something…and more lies about Catholicism, showing even more lack of knowledge about what he hates for no actual reason.[/quote]

Jesus told of His church being built Mt. 16:18, which was built on Peter, the rock…and His Church was formed from His pierced side on the Crucifix.

365

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Blessed are the persecuted, I suppose. >>>[/quote]Oh please dear Christopher tell me you didn’t just say this. THIS is persecution? Welcome to post modern American Christianity. I have no problem with the - thing, I use uppercase out of respect, but to call that discipline? [quote]Brother Chris wrote:It is not taking His name in vain, but if I don’t write it or say it then I can’t possibly take it in vain. [/quote]This is legalistic bondage Chris. Yes it is. I am not making fun of you so do not take it that way. You wanna not take God’s name in vain? Recognize that while you claim His gospel as your own, every syllable that falls from your lips or keyboard is taken by the world as representing Him. Please let that sink in. It took me a while to get that.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:Yes, more discipline. You going to make fun of me for doing charitable acts as well, “more stuff”? How about me praying the Pater Noster or the Ave Maria or the Rosary after supper? How about praying seven times a day? How about waking up at 0500 so I can do my Holy Hour before I start the day? Or, how about learning Latin? How about going to mass, is that just more “stuff”?[/quote]Yes… it is. It’s zeal without knowledge my friend. It is just not within my power to make you see that.[quote]Brother Chris wrote: <<< Don’t be like Tirib and ignore the question.[/quote]Yeah, Zeb. Don’t be like Trib. Can’t see how all these questions I’ve ignored after the ten thousandth time of answering? Whatever you do, don’t do that.

366

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Lies, lies, lies. What the fuck are you talking about? This is heresy of kind I have never seen.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…lies about being alive at Genesis 12, or something…and more lies about Catholicism, showing even more lack of knowledge about what he hates for no actual reason.[/quote]

Jesus told of His church being built Mt. 16:18, which was built on Peter, the rock…and His Church was formed from His pierced side on the Crucifix.[/quote]

Word! It’s the truth, period.

367

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Yeah, Zeb. Don’t be like Trib. Can’t see how all these questions I’ve ignored after the ten thousandth time of answering? Whatever you do, don’t do that.
[/quote]

WHAT! I would like to know when you have even answered ONE question. Can you show me, or even recall when you have given an honest answer.

I know you are ignoring me, but I am not ignoring you!!! I would just like honest answers with out a diatribe. I know you see them because when I point out a mistake, you stop making it shortly there after and switch gears…So don’t worry, I still feel loved…

368

It’s called devotion. How exactly is it ‘zeal with out knowledge’? Hmmm. This is very arrogant of you. You really need to stop that crap if you want to make an impact. Calling the church a ‘whore’ is not going to change any minds, that’s for sure. We ask you for your knowledge, you just ignore it and switch gears…That’s either weakness, or a lack of knowledge.

I for one am not to good to repeat answers already given if it helps get the point across. You should take a debate class or something. If your faith is superior prove it, belittling our faith doesn’t prove anything. It’s just a random ad hominem.

369

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Brother Chris

What’s with the G-d. Why can’t you spell it? Sorry I really don’t get that. Is it another funny little Catholic thingy?
[/quote]

No, it’s a funny Jewish thing. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy G-d in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Comes after Thou shalt worship the Lord thy G-d and Him only shalt thou serve. And, before Thou shalt keep the sabbath holy.[/quote]

How is discussing God taking his name in vain? And if it is taking it in vain how is putting a dash in place of the “o” not taking it in vain. You think he doesn’t know that you’ve replaced the “o” with a dash?

Just more stuff huh?
[/quote]

Blessed are the persecuted, I suppose.

It is not taking His name in vain, but if I don’t write it or say it then I can’t possibly take it in vain. Go ahead, go make fun of Jewbacca, as well. Jewbacca does the same thing, most Jews (which I was raised in a partial Jewish household) don’t write out G-d, or say His names.

Yes, more discipline. You going to make fun of me for doing charitable acts as well, “more stuff”? How about me praying the Pater Noster or the Ave Maria or the Rosary after supper? How about praying seven times a day? How about waking up at 0500 so I can do my Holy Hour before I start the day? Or, how about learning Latin? How about going to mass, is that just more “stuff”?

You have a problem with disciplines, fine don’t do them. But, what doctrines aren’t important, Zeb? What did G-d say that wasn’t important? Don’t be like Tirib and ignore the question.[/quote]

Follow your own path brother. As long as you have accepted Christ as the savior you know where you’ll be someday.

Peace,

Zeb

370

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Nobody here is claim to be a TP. Their theories are handy for supporting causal relationship. We’re not trying to do what they do. Further, the discussion is about God. God is the creator. If you consider him something different we are not talking about the same thing. I use their damn good speculative theories to prove that nothing exists uncaused, save for that which caused with out being caused. Nothing more. I am not sure why think that the postulations by people with a lot of letters behind their names is off limits? We can’t talk about and use it? Why? Is it sacred in some way? We can only butcher it if we regurgitate the information incorrectly. If we have not, then we have not done anybody any injustice. We’re not debating their validity.[/quote]

First, you assume you’re interpreting AND applying what you read correctly. And, do you realize you just wrote “theory” and “prove” in the same sentence? A theory cannot “prove” anything. A theory is a theory - “nothing more” as you say above. And, it is NOT proven that “nothing exists uncaused, save for that which caused with out being caused.”
[/quote]

I am not interpreting anything. Second, if I made a mistake then show me what it is. Don’t say I repeated or interpreted anything wrong unless you can show me. Otherwise what the point of saying it. Did I repeat anything wrong? If so I will correct it. Don’t tell me I may have made a mistake and then not prove it.

I am using arguments others use to show that even if said theory is correct, it still does not deny causation. So yes, I used theory and prove in the same sentence, because whether or not theory is correct, causation stands regardless…

All things are caused save for that which caused it, is a deductive logical necessity. If you can prove it wrong then do so. If you can find even one tiny thing that exists with out a cause, then tell me what it is.[/quote]

There is no evidence the universe was “caused”. None. So stop it. The best you can say is that there are promising theories that the “known universe” was caused by the big bang. And the “known universe” is still very “unknowable”. And big bang theory is still subject to dispute. We cannot say what existed prior to any such cause (or “bang”), if any. Your “deductive logical necessity” is trapped in your perception of the world, like the one dimensional creature on flatland, to use a TP thought experiment. You are trying to “perceive” and “think” and then apply theories that only have math behind them. No one “thought” or “perceived” such theories. They are math theories at the end of the day. You’re taking cold hard advanced math and theorems, dressing them up in your 3 dimensional world which includes a potentially faulty perception of time, and you’re using them to support your opinions on religion, which I repeat, the latter is a matter of faith. You’re better off arguing your scriptures.

Anyway, these threads ALWAYS end the same way. With frustration. Wars have been waged about this nonsense - don’t go fooling yourself that you’ll make any headway with the opposition.[/quote]

You’re job is easy, prove it wasn’t caused. I have laid down my arguments plenty in many different forms. Everything that exists exists for a reason unless you posit that what exists was uncaused, aka. random, or in other words something from nothing.

Stop it? Fuck off, you have no right to tell me what to do. I will do what I want,say what I want and will not rely on the fear of appealing to authority ← which in it self is a logical fallacy.

If you don’t like what I say, then prove it wrong or fuck off, period.

I’ll even make it easy here is a link read, weap…It’s full of points and counter points.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmological-argument/

Shall I send for the Nobel folks for I found the one guy who can disprove the cosmological form? All I have seen you do is tell me I don’t have the smarts or the right to question anybody. That’s your problem not mine.
So genius, PROVE ME WRONG.[/quote]

Does anyone notice it didn’t take long for this “Christian” to start acting like one? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Dude, really? Take a valium please.

Nothing about the existence, start or end of the universe can be “proven”. We don’t know - and you know that, and that’s why you talk around the point. Neither I, nor anyone else, can prove the “universe” (possibly a misnomer depending on what constitutes the “universe” and whether there are multiple and what, if anything lies beyond it) was “caused” or “uncaused”. No one. Not even your reference that you keep providing that I did read. The answer is simply unknowable right now and may never be none. Do you ever foresee a time in humanity when we can travel to the edge of the known and visible universe and “view it” or explore it? Do you ever foresee a time in humanity where we can view it, given it’s apparent expansion? No. And no. Until then, we have theories and a bunch of advanced math. Hell, we will probably never be able to view strings, if they in fact exist - strings being the result of advanced math.

So, “fuck off”? Is that what Jesus would say? You Christians are certainly an interesting bunch. Then again, you believe you’re “forgiven”, but will I forgive you?[/quote]

If you expect me to sit here and take badgering by you just because I am a Christian you can forget it. You question my qualifications on talking about this stuff on a body building web site? Really? I do have a resume, but I am not sending it to you.
Deductive arguments are known closed systems, you do not need to know everything about everything for something to be absolutely true.
Inferred or inductive arguments are the ‘best guesses’ where you do have to know everything about it for it to be an absolute truth <-that’s science.

Cosmology is a closed form, it has all the premises and a conclusion that follows that it needs to be a truth. The only thing you can do is disprove the premises, or the conclusion the argument structure is solid. You can work it over until you puke and you cannot break it.

I don’t give a rat’s ass what you think of me, or whether or not I am a Christian or not. You aren’t going to tell me what to do and what I can and cannot discuss. Who the fuck are you to do such a thing? What are your qualifications that allow you to come a boss people around? It’s clear you came here to badger me. So yes, you can fuck off if you don’t like it.
Further, I don’t rightly give a shit if you do or don’t ‘forgive’ me. I may be a Christian, but I am not a doormat.

[/quote]

Thanks again for showing your ass. I’d invite you and anyone else for that matter to look back at my replies to you and find any “badgering” or anything at all that could be construed as being direspectful toward you. You seem to have a problem with being challenged. A lot of little people are like that. You’re not alone. You may not be a doormat, but you’re an angry little Christian.

That aside, your arguments are flawed. You can discuss whatever you wish, but don’t get all angry when someone points out the flaws in your alleged “logic”. About the most accurate word you typed above is “guess”. That’s what our theories are, guesses, based on math.

They are not absolutes and considered the math behind them, you’d understand that there are many sleight of hand tricks to get the numbers to agree, based on UNKNOWNS. Have you considered the math behind string theory? Are you aware of it? There are so many unknowns about our universe, that to allege “facts” and “conclusions” as you do is shortsighted and foolish.

371

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Nobody here is claim to be a TP. Their theories are handy for supporting causal relationship. We’re not trying to do what they do. Further, the discussion is about God. God is the creator. If you consider him something different we are not talking about the same thing. I use their damn good speculative theories to prove that nothing exists uncaused, save for that which caused with out being caused. Nothing more. I am not sure why think that the postulations by people with a lot of letters behind their names is off limits? We can’t talk about and use it? Why? Is it sacred in some way? We can only butcher it if we regurgitate the information incorrectly. If we have not, then we have not done anybody any injustice. We’re not debating their validity.[/quote]

First, you assume you’re interpreting AND applying what you read correctly. And, do you realize you just wrote “theory” and “prove” in the same sentence? A theory cannot “prove” anything. A theory is a theory - “nothing more” as you say above. And, it is NOT proven that “nothing exists uncaused, save for that which caused with out being caused.”
[/quote]

I am not interpreting anything. Second, if I made a mistake then show me what it is. Don’t say I repeated or interpreted anything wrong unless you can show me. Otherwise what the point of saying it. Did I repeat anything wrong? If so I will correct it. Don’t tell me I may have made a mistake and then not prove it.

I am using arguments others use to show that even if said theory is correct, it still does not deny causation. So yes, I used theory and prove in the same sentence, because whether or not theory is correct, causation stands regardless…

All things are caused save for that which caused it, is a deductive logical necessity. If you can prove it wrong then do so. If you can find even one tiny thing that exists with out a cause, then tell me what it is.[/quote]

There is no evidence the universe was “caused”. None. So stop it. The best you can say is that there are promising theories that the “known universe” was caused by the big bang. And the “known universe” is still very “unknowable”. And big bang theory is still subject to dispute. We cannot say what existed prior to any such cause (or “bang”), if any. Your “deductive logical necessity” is trapped in your perception of the world, like the one dimensional creature on flatland, to use a TP thought experiment. You are trying to “perceive” and “think” and then apply theories that only have math behind them. No one “thought” or “perceived” such theories. They are math theories at the end of the day. You’re taking cold hard advanced math and theorems, dressing them up in your 3 dimensional world which includes a potentially faulty perception of time, and you’re using them to support your opinions on religion, which I repeat, the latter is a matter of faith. You’re better off arguing your scriptures.

Anyway, these threads ALWAYS end the same way. With frustration. Wars have been waged about this nonsense - don’t go fooling yourself that you’ll make any headway with the opposition.[/quote]

You’re job is easy, prove it wasn’t caused. I have laid down my arguments plenty in many different forms. Everything that exists exists for a reason unless you posit that what exists was uncaused, aka. random, or in other words something from nothing.

Stop it? Fuck off, you have no right to tell me what to do. I will do what I want,say what I want and will not rely on the fear of appealing to authority ← which in it self is a logical fallacy.

If you don’t like what I say, then prove it wrong or fuck off, period.

I’ll even make it easy here is a link read, weap…It’s full of points and counter points.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmological-argument/

Shall I send for the Nobel folks for I found the one guy who can disprove the cosmological form? All I have seen you do is tell me I don’t have the smarts or the right to question anybody. That’s your problem not mine.
So genius, PROVE ME WRONG.[/quote]

Does anyone notice it didn’t take long for this “Christian” to start acting like one? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Dude, really? Take a valium please.

Nothing about the existence, start or end of the universe can be “proven”. We don’t know - and you know that, and that’s why you talk around the point. Neither I, nor anyone else, can prove the “universe” (possibly a misnomer depending on what constitutes the “universe” and whether there are multiple and what, if anything lies beyond it) was “caused” or “uncaused”. No one. Not even your reference that you keep providing that I did read. The answer is simply unknowable right now and may never be none. Do you ever foresee a time in humanity when we can travel to the edge of the known and visible universe and “view it” or explore it? Do you ever foresee a time in humanity where we can view it, given it’s apparent expansion? No. And no. Until then, we have theories and a bunch of advanced math. Hell, we will probably never be able to view strings, if they in fact exist - strings being the result of advanced math.

So, “fuck off”? Is that what Jesus would say? You Christians are certainly an interesting bunch. Then again, you believe you’re “forgiven”, but will I forgive you?[/quote]

Why such the sense of morality?

And, Pat being a Catholic is only forgiven when he confesses and repents of his sins.[/quote]

I have plenty of sins, but defending myself isn’t one of them.[/quote]

And apparently being a gentleman is not one of them either.

372

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Brother Chris

What’s with the G-d. Why can’t you spell it? Sorry I really don’t get that. Is it another funny little Catholic thingy?
[/quote]

No, it’s a funny Jewish thing. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy G-d in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Comes after Thou shalt worship the Lord thy G-d and Him only shalt thou serve. And, before Thou shalt keep the sabbath holy.[/quote]

How is discussing God taking his name in vain? And if it is taking it in vain how is putting a dash in place of the “o” not taking it in vain. You think he doesn’t know that you’ve replaced the “o” with a dash?

Just more stuff huh?
[/quote]

“Stuff”. Nice way to put it. As if the omnipotent creator of the entire known and unknown universe has an objection to having his name (in fact, our name for him, not even “his” name) written. Yeah. That’s it. Couldn’t be man’s idea. [/quote]

Actually, He did give us His name. Like I told Zeb, go tell that to Jewbacca he does the same thing. I’m sure you wouldn’t because you don’t disrespect Jews like that because you’re afraid of being considered a bigot, but because I’m a Catholic, like a pig in mud, no problem being prejudice towards me being a Catholic.
[/quote]

Persecution complex? I thought that was the province of the jews? I’m not a bigot when I point out what I pointed out - that the supreme creator is probably not offended that you spelled his name. And last I check, whether “He” gave us His name or not is in dispute.

From where I sit, man gave him a name. Man wrote some scriptures. The supreme creator in my mind probably doesn’t need a publisher. By the way, if I were bigotted, I would NOT be afraid of being judged so. Personally, I don’t care about your beliefs, they are your own and they do not harm or affect me personally.

373

[quote]pat wrote:

It’s called devotion. How exactly is it ‘zeal with out knowledge’? Hmmm. This is very arrogant of you. You really need to stop that crap if you want to make an impact. Calling the church a ‘whore’ is not going to change any minds, that’s for sure. We ask you for your knowledge, you just ignore it and switch gears…That’s either weakness, or a lack of knowledge.

I for one am not to good to repeat answers already given if it helps get the point across. You should take a debate class or something. If your faith is superior prove it, belittling our faith doesn’t prove anything. It’s just a random ad hominem.[/quote]

You “yelling” the loudest and acting like an angry little man is not going to “change any minds, that’s for sure” - or, win any new converts.

374

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Blessed are the persecuted, I suppose. >>>[/quote]Oh please dear Christopher tell me you didn’t just say this. THIS is persecution? Welcome to post modern American Christianity. I have no problem with the - thing, I use uppercase out of respect, but to call that discipline? [quote]Brother Chris wrote:It is not taking His name in vain, but if I don’t write it or say it then I can’t possibly take it in vain. [/quote]This is legalistic bondage Chris. Yes it is. I am not making fun of you so do not take it that way. You wanna not take God’s name in vain? Recognize that while you claim His gospel as your own, every syllable that falls from your lips or keyboard is taken by the world as representing Him. Please let that sink in. It took me a while to get that.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:Yes, more discipline. You going to make fun of me for doing charitable acts as well, “more stuff”? How about me praying the Pater Noster or the Ave Maria or the Rosary after supper? How about praying seven times a day? How about waking up at 0500 so I can do my Holy Hour before I start the day? Or, how about learning Latin? How about going to mass, is that just more “stuff”?[/quote]Yes… it is. It’s zeal without knowledge my friend. It is just not within my power to make you see that.[quote]Brother Chris wrote: <<< Don’t be like Tirib and ignore the question.[/quote]Yeah, Zeb. Don’t be like Trib. Can’t see how all these questions I’ve ignored after the ten thousandth time of answering? Whatever you do, don’t do that.
[/quote]

@Tirib, you do realise that I know what persecution is, I’m Catholic in America. The only thing you’re allowed to be prejudice against is Catholicism and Catholics. Everything else, off limits. I’m glad you use the upper case out of respect, however my natural inclination is to write it G-d because of my grandmother and grandfather. Not my fault Zeb doesn’t like tradition, if he doesn’t like it, oh well I don’t give a fuck. Yes, discipline otherwise more popularly known as small ‘t’ tradition. It’s not doctrine or dogma, but is used. Kind of like Latin’s make the cross from left to right and Greek’s make the cross right to left. It is a discipline. Isn’t a matter of salvation necessarily but a custom, comes from the culture, &c.

No, it’s called not being a individualist and following the tradition of my forebearers. No, I don’t want to talk G-d’s name in vain, what is with these questions Tirib?

Zeal without knowledge, I know exactly what everything there is for, charitable acts the theological virtue which is loving G-d above all things and doing it through his creation. Praying the Pater Noster because the Lord told us to, Praying the Ave Maria because it comes from the Bible and the Blessed Virgin Mary gave it to St. Dominic. We pray seven times, because the Bible tells us to and to pray unceasingly, and I wake up at 5 o’clock because I sit in the presence of the Lord, I sit at the feet of the cross like his mother the Apostle to the Apostles did at Calvary. I learn Latin & Greek because it is our Sacred languages depending on which rite you are in. I go to Mass, because Jesus gave us the Mass, do you not to service? Do you not do as the Bible tells you to, or is it okay to not go to Church on Sunday.

375

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Nobody here is claim to be a TP. Their theories are handy for supporting causal relationship. We’re not trying to do what they do. Further, the discussion is about God. God is the creator. If you consider him something different we are not talking about the same thing. I use their damn good speculative theories to prove that nothing exists uncaused, save for that which caused with out being caused. Nothing more. I am not sure why think that the postulations by people with a lot of letters behind their names is off limits? We can’t talk about and use it? Why? Is it sacred in some way? We can only butcher it if we regurgitate the information incorrectly. If we have not, then we have not done anybody any injustice. We’re not debating their validity.[/quote]

First, you assume you’re interpreting AND applying what you read correctly. And, do you realize you just wrote “theory” and “prove” in the same sentence? A theory cannot “prove” anything. A theory is a theory - “nothing more” as you say above. And, it is NOT proven that “nothing exists uncaused, save for that which caused with out being caused.”
[/quote]

I am not interpreting anything. Second, if I made a mistake then show me what it is. Don’t say I repeated or interpreted anything wrong unless you can show me. Otherwise what the point of saying it. Did I repeat anything wrong? If so I will correct it. Don’t tell me I may have made a mistake and then not prove it.

I am using arguments others use to show that even if said theory is correct, it still does not deny causation. So yes, I used theory and prove in the same sentence, because whether or not theory is correct, causation stands regardless…

All things are caused save for that which caused it, is a deductive logical necessity. If you can prove it wrong then do so. If you can find even one tiny thing that exists with out a cause, then tell me what it is.[/quote]

There is no evidence the universe was “caused”. None. So stop it. The best you can say is that there are promising theories that the “known universe” was caused by the big bang. And the “known universe” is still very “unknowable”. And big bang theory is still subject to dispute. We cannot say what existed prior to any such cause (or “bang”), if any. Your “deductive logical necessity” is trapped in your perception of the world, like the one dimensional creature on flatland, to use a TP thought experiment. You are trying to “perceive” and “think” and then apply theories that only have math behind them. No one “thought” or “perceived” such theories. They are math theories at the end of the day. You’re taking cold hard advanced math and theorems, dressing them up in your 3 dimensional world which includes a potentially faulty perception of time, and you’re using them to support your opinions on religion, which I repeat, the latter is a matter of faith. You’re better off arguing your scriptures.

Anyway, these threads ALWAYS end the same way. With frustration. Wars have been waged about this nonsense - don’t go fooling yourself that you’ll make any headway with the opposition.[/quote]

You’re job is easy, prove it wasn’t caused. I have laid down my arguments plenty in many different forms. Everything that exists exists for a reason unless you posit that what exists was uncaused, aka. random, or in other words something from nothing.

Stop it? Fuck off, you have no right to tell me what to do. I will do what I want,say what I want and will not rely on the fear of appealing to authority ← which in it self is a logical fallacy.

If you don’t like what I say, then prove it wrong or fuck off, period.

I’ll even make it easy here is a link read, weap…It’s full of points and counter points.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmological-argument/

Shall I send for the Nobel folks for I found the one guy who can disprove the cosmological form? All I have seen you do is tell me I don’t have the smarts or the right to question anybody. That’s your problem not mine.
So genius, PROVE ME WRONG.[/quote]

Does anyone notice it didn’t take long for this “Christian” to start acting like one? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Dude, really? Take a valium please.

Nothing about the existence, start or end of the universe can be “proven”. We don’t know - and you know that, and that’s why you talk around the point. Neither I, nor anyone else, can prove the “universe” (possibly a misnomer depending on what constitutes the “universe” and whether there are multiple and what, if anything lies beyond it) was “caused” or “uncaused”. No one. Not even your reference that you keep providing that I did read. The answer is simply unknowable right now and may never be none. Do you ever foresee a time in humanity when we can travel to the edge of the known and visible universe and “view it” or explore it? Do you ever foresee a time in humanity where we can view it, given it’s apparent expansion? No. And no. Until then, we have theories and a bunch of advanced math. Hell, we will probably never be able to view strings, if they in fact exist - strings being the result of advanced math.

So, “fuck off”? Is that what Jesus would say? You Christians are certainly an interesting bunch. Then again, you believe you’re “forgiven”, but will I forgive you?[/quote]

If you expect me to sit here and take badgering by you just because I am a Christian you can forget it. You question my qualifications on talking about this stuff on a body building web site? Really? I do have a resume, but I am not sending it to you.
Deductive arguments are known closed systems, you do not need to know everything about everything for something to be absolutely true.
Inferred or inductive arguments are the ‘best guesses’ where you do have to know everything about it for it to be an absolute truth <-that’s science.

Cosmology is a closed form, it has all the premises and a conclusion that follows that it needs to be a truth. The only thing you can do is disprove the premises, or the conclusion the argument structure is solid. You can work it over until you puke and you cannot break it.

I don’t give a rat’s ass what you think of me, or whether or not I am a Christian or not. You aren’t going to tell me what to do and what I can and cannot discuss. Who the fuck are you to do such a thing? What are your qualifications that allow you to come a boss people around? It’s clear you came here to badger me. So yes, you can fuck off if you don’t like it.
Further, I don’t rightly give a shit if you do or don’t ‘forgive’ me. I may be a Christian, but I am not a doormat.

[/quote]

Thanks again for showing your ass. I’d invite you and anyone else for that matter to look back at my replies to you and find any “badgering” or anything at all that could be construed as being direspectful toward you. You seem to have a problem with being challenged. A lot of little people are like that. You’re not alone. You may not be a doormat, but you’re an angry little Christian.

That aside, your arguments are flawed. You can discuss whatever you wish, but don’t get all angry when someone points out the flaws in your alleged “logic”. About the most accurate word you typed above is “guess”. That’s what our theories are, guesses, based on math.

They are not absolutes and considered the math behind them, you’d understand that there are many sleight of hand tricks to get the numbers to agree, based on UNKNOWNS. Have you considered the math behind string theory? Are you aware of it? There are so many unknowns about our universe, that to allege “facts” and “conclusions” as you do is shortsighted and foolish.

[/quote]

Oh, Precisely what flaw did you point out? Looking back, I don’t see a a single counter argument. All you have done is point out how little we know and how I shouldn’t dare use the science because I am not as smart as they are.
If you got a counter argument, give it. I’d like to see. All you have done is ad hominums. Secondly, if you read as carefully as you claim, you’d realize that forlife is arguing based on science, not me. Why don’t you tell him how unqualified and unworthy he is for using it to argue that God does not exist?

So if you can counter argue, let’s see it. I invite you to refute the argument.

376

By the way gentlemen arguing about God on an Internet message board will neither convert those who do not believe, or sway those who do believe. Both sides do this for reasons other than the purpose of conversion.

I just wanted to add that before I walked out the door.

Bye,

Zeb

377

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

It’s called devotion. How exactly is it ‘zeal with out knowledge’? Hmmm. This is very arrogant of you. You really need to stop that crap if you want to make an impact. Calling the church a ‘whore’ is not going to change any minds, that’s for sure. We ask you for your knowledge, you just ignore it and switch gears…That’s either weakness, or a lack of knowledge.

I for one am not to good to repeat answers already given if it helps get the point across. You should take a debate class or something. If your faith is superior prove it, belittling our faith doesn’t prove anything. It’s just a random ad hominem.[/quote]

You “yelling” the loudest and acting like an angry little man is not going to “change any minds, that’s for sure” - or, win any new converts.[/quote]

PROVE ME WRONG, big man…Should be simple right? I don’t know what I am talking about right? Go nuts, prove me wrong. Attacking me doesn’t refute anything.

378

[quote]ZEB wrote:
By the way gentlemen arguing about God on an Internet message board will neither convert those who do not believe, or sway those who do believe. Both sides do this for reasons other than the purpose of conversion.

I just wanted to add that before I walked out the door.

Bye,

Zeb[/quote]

Yep.

379

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Brother Chris

What’s with the G-d. Why can’t you spell it? Sorry I really don’t get that. Is it another funny little Catholic thingy?
[/quote]

No, it’s a funny Jewish thing. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy G-d in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Comes after Thou shalt worship the Lord thy G-d and Him only shalt thou serve. And, before Thou shalt keep the sabbath holy.[/quote]

How is discussing God taking his name in vain? And if it is taking it in vain how is putting a dash in place of the “o” not taking it in vain. You think he doesn’t know that you’ve replaced the “o” with a dash?

Just more stuff huh?
[/quote]

“Stuff”. Nice way to put it. As if the omnipotent creator of the entire known and unknown universe has an objection to having his name (in fact, our name for him, not even “his” name) written. Yeah. That’s it. Couldn’t be man’s idea. [/quote]

Actually, He did give us His name. Like I told Zeb, go tell that to Jewbacca he does the same thing. I’m sure you wouldn’t because you don’t disrespect Jews like that because you’re afraid of being considered a bigot, but because I’m a Catholic, like a pig in mud, no problem being prejudice towards me being a Catholic.
[/quote]

Persecution complex? I thought that was the province of the jews? I’m not a bigot when I point out what I pointed out - that the supreme creator is probably not offended that you spelled his name. And last I check, whether “He” gave us His name or not is in dispute.

From where I sit, man gave him a name. Man wrote some scriptures. The supreme creator in my mind probably doesn’t need a publisher. By the way, if I were bigotted, I would NOT be afraid of being judged so. Personally, I don’t care about your beliefs, they are your own and they do not harm or affect me personally.[/quote]

I don’t see how it is in dispute, either the Bible is right or wrong. And, no I don’t have a persecution complex.

380

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

It’s called devotion. How exactly is it ‘zeal with out knowledge’? Hmmm. This is very arrogant of you. You really need to stop that crap if you want to make an impact. Calling the church a ‘whore’ is not going to change any minds, that’s for sure. We ask you for your knowledge, you just ignore it and switch gears…That’s either weakness, or a lack of knowledge.

I for one am not to good to repeat answers already given if it helps get the point across. You should take a debate class or something. If your faith is superior prove it, belittling our faith doesn’t prove anything. It’s just a random ad hominem.[/quote]

You “yelling” the loudest and acting like an angry little man is not going to “change any minds, that’s for sure” - or, win any new converts.[/quote]

And you follow him around PWI like a jilted little bitch.

Get real, guy. You are about as pathetic as they come, and your MO is blindingly clear. You single Pat out (and you’ve done it before about relatively the same subject), you poke and prod and tiptoe around outright insults until you have, yes, badgered him into engaging you with hostility, then you act all surprised and victimized, as if you were just standing here whistling with your hands in your pockets. All the while, as Pat has pointed out, your most insightful observation has been, “You guys, but only Pat, are all wrong because we can’t know anything.”

You tried this in GAL when, I believe, somebody was in the throes of depression, and the group didn’t put up with it there, and you got gang raped. Would you like me to find that particular thread? I guess you come here and do it now to make yourself feel better. How sad. Seriously.

Little man indeed.