[quote]Sloth wrote:
For an agnostic, you sure use absolute phrases. Such as, fairy tales.[/quote]
LOL. He’s uncertain, but he’s absolutely certain the Christian God doesn’t exist, because the Christian God doesn’t validate certain of his viewpoints.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Sloth wrote:
For an agnostic, you sure use absolute phrases. Such as, fairy tales.
Fairy tales are stories that haven’t been substantiated by facts.
And let’s be honest. You dismiss the fairy tales of other religions as just that, while selectively considering only your own fairy tales to be true.[/quote]
Then you’re an atheist.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So then life after death to you, is a fairy tale. Nothingness envelopes your senses, you let loose your death rattle, and cease to be. There can be nothing ambigious or mysterious about it. My point still stands.[/quote]
Where did I say life after death is a fairy tale? I doubt there is life after death, but don’t see much evidence either way.
You’re still dodging my question about divorcees being civilly discriminated against.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
LOL. He’s uncertain, but he’s absolutely certain the Christian God doesn’t exist, because the Christian God doesn’t validate certain of his viewpoints. [/quote]
I’m not absolutely certain the Christian god doesn’t exist, I just don’t consider it any more likely than the thousands of other god stories people have made up over the millenia.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Then you’re an atheist.[/quote]
An atheist claims there are no gods.
An agnostic admits there could be one, many, or no gods at all.
A believer picks and chooses his god based on indoctrination and personal preference, while insisting that the thousands of other gods are fairy tales.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Sloth wrote:
So then life after death to you, is a fairy tale. Nothingness envelopes your senses, you let loose your death rattle, and cease to be. There can be nothing ambigious or mysterious about it. My point still stands.
Where did I say life after death is a fairy tale? I doubt there is life after death, but don’t see much evidence either way.
You’re still dodging my question about divorcees being civilly discriminated against.[/quote]
You Said: “Fairy tales are stories that haven’t been substantiated by facts.”
What about divorcees? Not sure why you’re asking about divorce here, but whatever. And, I don’t understand what you’re asking. Clarify. Are you saying divorcees are discriminated agaist through divorce trials, and judgements? Or, that they’re not discriminated against?
[quote]forlife wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Then you’re an atheist.
An atheist claims there are no gods.
[/quote]
But you make absolute statements, like “fairy tales,” concerning the nature of God. And of possible revelation of God.
[quote]forlife wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
LOL. He’s uncertain, but he’s absolutely certain the Christian God doesn’t exist, because the Christian God doesn’t validate certain of his viewpoints.
I’m not absolutely certain the Christian god doesn’t exist, I just don’t consider it any more likely than the thousands of other god stories people have made up over the millenia.[/quote]
If you’re not certain, how do you know He’s made up?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
You Said: “Fairy tales are stories that haven’t been substantiated by facts.”[/quote]
If I were to make up a story about life after death, such as Catholic purgatory or Mormon Celestial glory, that would qualify as a fairy tale.
The actual existence of life after death, stories aside, is an unknown.
You totally missed the point, which was that the new testament specifically says divorce is a sin in the same way the new testament says homosexuality is a sin. If you are going to civilly discriminate against gays based on your holy book, why aren’t you willing to civilly discriminate against divorcees as well?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
But you make absolute statements, like “fairy tales,” concerning the nature of God. And of possible revelation of God.
[/quote]
If it is a story without any substantiation by facts, what else would it be if not a fairy tale?
There could be a god(s), but if so we have no evidence for him/her/it to date, and any stories would be just that.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
If you’re not certain, how do you know He’s made up? [/quote]
See my last post.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Sloth wrote:
But you make absolute statements, like “fairy tales,” concerning the nature of God. And of possible revelation of God.
If it is a story without any substantiation by facts, what else would it be if not a fairy tale?
There could be a god(s), but if so we have no evidence for him/her/it to date, and any stories would be just that.[/quote]
Have you finished the Hoffmeier book already? How about “The Bible as History,” by Keller?
It’s not that there’s no evidence, it’s that there is none you would accept due to your presuppositions.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Sloth wrote:
You Said: “Fairy tales are stories that haven’t been substantiated by facts.”
If I were to make up a story about life after death, such as Catholic purgatory or Mormon Celestial glory, that would qualify as a fairy tale.[/quote]
A few posts ago you said you couldn’t be certain about the existence or non-existence of a Christian God. So, it follows that you can’t be certain in either way of a Christian after-life. Yet, you use absolute wording.
Wait, why do you stop at life after death as to what constitutes a “story?” Why are you seperating out the concept of life after death from the rest of the elements of these “stories?” And again, you said “Fairy tales are stories that haven’t been substantiated by facts.”
[quote]
What about divorcees? Not sure why you’re asking about divorce here, but whatever. And, I don’t understand what your asking. Clarify. Are saying divorcees are discriminated agaist through divorce trials, and judgements? Or, that they’re not discriminated against?[/quote]
And this is an example of you arguing against “fairy tale” opponents. Go back a few posts. I specifically said that my civic stance concerning homosexual marriage is informed by secular reasoning. I’ve always produced secular arguements, outlining my reasoning, in every thread. You’re the one seeking religious arguements!
The New Testament doesn’t inform my stance concerning the civil instituion of marriage, either! Why are you even posing this question to me, then? Now, on a secular level, I would and do argue that the government’s version of divorce has been harmful.
And I’m not sure alot of divorced men would agree with you that they haven’t faced discrimination through the prodedures of divorce, and perhaps even post divorce dating.
.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Sloth wrote:
But you make absolute statements, like “fairy tales,” concerning the nature of God. And of possible revelation of God.
If it is a story without any substantiation by facts, what else would it be if not a fairy tale?
There could be a god(s), but if so we have no evidence for him/her/it to date, and any stories would be just that.[/quote]
“I’m not absolutely certain the Christian god doesn’t exist, I just don’t consider it any more likely than the thousands of other god stories people have made up over the millenia.”
And again, with you saying “If it is a story without any substantiation by facts, what else would it be if not a fairy tale,” why isn’t life after death just a story unsunstantiated by facts?
Again I think you misunderstand me. You assume that because there is no proof for you that I would then have no proof that God, Jesus Christ, or the Holy Ghost exist. I know they do, for the reasons I stated earlier.
As far as living proof that they exist, step outside and look around, and don’t give me the evilution B.S. Everyday that you wake up and smell the roses you should be thanking God for one more day upon this earth with the ones you love, regardless of your personal beliefs.
As far as every religion on Earth believing in similar yet different Gods, you must have forgotten the third discussion. Remember the one about a Restoration of all things? Remember the part about Christ’s Church being upon the Earth during Christ’s time?
How it was like a mirror, one complete gospel. Then when Christ died and was taken from the Earth the Gospel was taught by the twelve. Then they started to be killed off and we had the Gospel taken from the Earth, hence the dark ages.
That would have been like the mirror falling and shattering into millions of pieces. There were good men upon the Earth who wanted to have religion but they did not know where to turn. So, they took a part of the gospel and built a church based upon faith, and another upon works, another praised Mary, and so forth, until we had so many churches focusing on different things.
We even had evil men who aspired to concur the world and based it upon religious ideologies. There were so many different churches and religions, but not one that contained the fulness of the gospel as it was taught by Christ. You know the rest of the story.
This really is a simple explanation as to why there can be so many churches that appear to believe in the same thing but are different. Because they are all based upon the same gospel. They all contain pieces of the truth, they all have good men who strive very hard to live the gospel as they understand it.
They receive personal revelation, and they feel the spirit. Because they are living good lives. They have done what they understand to be the truth, and as God has said if you do what he asks you will be rewarded. God is no respecter of persons.
Is there one true Church on the Earth, which contains the Gospel of Jesus Christ as it was taught by Jesus Christ? I know I have found it. But, it is not for me to tell someone else what church to except or not. I can share the Gospel, but it is up to you to do the things necessary to obtain the personal revelation, which you say you already have.
This is why I know, that you understand what I’m talking about. When I say, you can’t deny that there is a God, and that when we all stand before him at the last judgement his judgement will be just, and we can greet each other there having a bright recollection of all the things we have discussed here, and we will finally have an answer to all our questions.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
And also to all others that you at least try to debate with. Illusions of message board granduer is only one of your many problems.[/quote]
Again, I repeat because you can’t seem to read:
Just you.
Ooh, you don’t think my insults are up to your conservative standard! I’m insulted!
[quote]One more of your problems. You can’t understand the difference between “respect” for another poster and ass kissing. I drew the comparison to point out the difference between someone who really is intellectually capable and someone like you who THINKS he’s intellectually capable.
I know…I know you don’t understand…What else is knew?[/quote]
When did I say I “think” TB23 is intellectually capable? I know he is. Learn to read retard.
[quote]I’ve never once met a liberal in person or on the Internet who wants to be categorized as a liberal. You fit the bill perfectly. Your posts are usually rife with liberal dogma. But of course you deny being a liberal…I understand that completely…no one wants to be called a liberal. But you’re actually far worse than the typical liberal. You’re also a “know it all” most liberals know when to shut up. Your arrogance keeps you from ever shutting up. That’s when you usually get put in your place (owned as they say) by the other posters on this board.
It’s fun to watch…entertaining…but more on that later.[/quote]
More categorizing. Yay.
[quote]Ha ha…I wish (and many others do too I’m sure) that you knew what the fuck you were talking about. Some of my harshest debates on this forum have been with rainjack. Do some research next time before you make an ass of yourself.
Sorry, don’t even recall this poster. I’m sure he’s bright though if you are comparing us.
I do agree with TB on many issues. Who do you often agree with? forliar? Professor Post? Ha ha…okay enough said on that.[/quote]
More fail. You do it and you know it. Minor disagreements are trivial. I’ve disagreed with a lot of posters on this board. I just don’t kiss their asses once I realize they’re “bigger and scarier” than me.
I’ve never seen any semblance of an argument from you on this board. Pot, kettle?
[quote]But as I’ve said of forliar, I want you to keep posting the entertainment value is priceless and you play a certain part on this forum. The role of liberal ass clown has never been portrayed better.
Keep it up and thanks for the laughs.[/quote]
More of this pot kettle stuff comes to mind.
I have to ask though, how old are you? I can’t imagine a normal adult male name calling (forliar, obuma, etc).
[quote]forlife wrote:
You’re trying to argue that every divorce is a dishonest act? Get real.[/quote]
Sure. I know it’s hard to admit sins and turn the other cheek, but go on blaming the Church for your decisions and the decisions of whatever narrow population of homosexuals you’re trying to define as being victimized by the Church.
[quote]I’ve argued just the opposite, numerous times. I believe love is far deeper, more significant, and more encompassing, than just the sexual aspect. Sexual orientation affects not only who you find physically attractive, but with whom you are able to share intimacy on all levels. You probably wouldn’t realize that, having never tried a relationship with someone contrary to your natural orientation.
[/quote]
You’re wrong on two counts:
First, I’m not sure exactly which way you’re wrong, either you conscribe orientation in the context of relationships to sex, which is wrong, or I am MARRIED to someone who is, in many many ways, contrary to my natural orientation.
Sexual orientation is almost entirely (even strictly) based on physical attraction. No one would describe a man who has sex exclusively with women, with or without intimacy, as celibate or a women who has sex exclusively with women, with or without intimacy, as straight.
An FtM transgendered woman (that is, having only X chromosomes and a penis), sucking on a phallus (attached or not to anyone/thing of any gender) would hardly be called a heterosexual act even though a man screwing a ewe would be. Intimate family members are hardly homo/heterosexual or incestuous. Intimacy is, at best, a tangential factor in sexual orientation.
[quote]Bigd1970 wrote:
Again I think you misunderstand me. You assume that because there is no proof for you that I would then have no proof that God, Jesus Christ, or the Holy Ghost exist. I know they do, for the reasons I stated earlier.[/quote]
I understand you very well, because I have been there myself. I know it is hard to see that, given how I now view the world, but believe me when I tell you that I have been there. I was sincere, devout, and 100% confident in my testimony of the LDS church.
I KNEW that it was true, and would have given my life for it. I could never in my wildest dreams imagine denying what I knew to be true at that time.
Think it through. I’m talking about millions of people who are living good lives and receive a spiritual confirmation of specific facts which are directly contrary to the spiritual confirmation others have received. If a Catholic receives a powerful spiritual witness that the Pope is God’s chosen servant, and that one must be baptized into the Catholic church to avoid damnation, how do you reconcile that? You say you know that you have found the “one true Church on the Earth, which contains the Gospel of Jesus Christ”, but what if somebody receives that same powerful spiritual witness for a different church? Clearly, you can’t both be right.
After researching the LDS church, it became obvious to me that it doesn’t have a divine origin. Joseph Smith taking the wives of other faithful church leaders was just one example. His translation of the “Book of Abraham” was a complete fabrication, once the Rosetta stone made it possible to translate Egyptian.
The scrolls proved to be nothing other than common funerary documents. And the list goes on. If you believe in searching for truth with a sincere heart and real intent, study my website with an open mind and see where you end up.
http://trialsofascension.net/mormon.html
If you’re happy with your life as it currently stands, feel free to ignore everything I just said. It’s your call.