Faith in Christ is Completely Logical

[savagewind]

Can you make someone else loyal to anything? No. Who would say yes to that?
Can you make someone a disciple? You say yes but I say no. Enough people say yes that I become wrong.

 

[Robert.Evans]

We are not arguing what hate means. I'm going to faint now. OK?

You should swoon. They used to do a lot of swooning in the olden days. It took a lot of soons to make an attempt at a faint. Faints were something you had to work up to once you had successfully achieved the swoon... I shall try to catch you

 

[Madtown]

Because I am a Christian.

We, as in us Christians, who are privileged to be blessed with a greater knowledge then non believers

Ah, so you're special. Special in God's eyes, relative to other humans in this world who God created, but deposited into regions where christianity doesn't exist? Interesting that followers of other religions say the same thing, that they are "privileged and blessed" with greater knowledge than others. Irony.

What do you mean when using the term "God (whichever version)" in a provocative and argumentive taunt. 19 posts and you are already being offensive.

I assume you're aware there's more than 1 flavor, "version", of religion in the world at large? Meaning of course, that different humans follow different paths, and think of God differently than you do. How you find this fact to be offensive, I have no idea. Perhaps you're overly-sensitive.

Not overly apt at the deductive reasoning are we.

No, you don't appear to be.

I do not doubt God's power.

Then you must believe it would be fully possible for God to write his own word? Of course. Wouldn't that be the more effective way to get the message out, just do it yourself instead of relying on imperfect human beings? If God wrote it himself and provided to all, then there wouldn't be as many questions if it really was God's word. As it is, written by humans, with each religious variant having their own writings, it's a competition to see who can convince others that they really have the "correct" way. I think you doubt God's power.

 

[Serenity7855]

Ah, so you're special. Special in God's eyes, relative to other humans in this world who God created, but deposited into regions where christianity doesn't exist? Interesting that followers of other religions say the same thing, that they are "privileged and blessed" with greater knowledge than others. Irony.

If you had a morsel of an inkling about the Plan of Salvation then you would know that God is a just and fare God who will insure that everyone will have an opportunity to hear his word and chose for themselves. But you are probably one of those atheists who like confrontation, seizing upon every opportunity to contend, even though you don't have a clue about the subject you are trying to postulate.

If you do not believe in God then surely this is the last place you would want to be, on a thread claiming that Faith in Christ is Completely Logical

I assume you're aware there's more than 1 flavor, "version", of religion in the world at large? Meaning of course, that different humans follow different paths, and think of God differently than you do. How you find this fact to be offensive, I have no idea. Perhaps you're overly-sensitive.

"God (whichever version)" is an arrogantly sarcastic and condescending taunt, and was completely unnecessary. Funny, I do tend to be sensitive to unnecessary and provocative slurs.

I do not find the varieties of religion in the world offensive, I find your belligerent antipathetical rhetoric offensive.

No, you don't appear to be

That is probably because I was referring to you, just to clarify.

Then you must believe it would be fully possible for God to write his own word? Of course

Yes, of course.

Wouldn't that be the more effective way to get the message out, just do it yourself instead of relying on imperfect human beings?

Absolutely. If you wanted the message to be meaningless by writing it yourself.

If God wrote it himself and provided to all, then there wouldn't be as many questions if it really was God's word.

True, true.

As it is, written by humans, with each religious variant having their own writings, it's a competition to see who can convince others that they really have the "correct" way.

Yes, that is true as well.

It seems as though you doubt the existence of my God. It is also patently clear and blatantly obvious that you are speaking from complete ignorance. I am not going to explain why that paragraph is a non sequitur from beginning to end. I am just going to savour the ignorance of yet another atheist who contends about something they know absolutely nothing about. To suggest that God could have done it is so erroneously imprecise that it beggars belief. Thanks for the laugh though.

I think you doubt God's power.

You think wrong, but no surprises there, ah

 

[Madtown]

If you had a morsel of an inkling about the Plan of Salvation then you would know that God is a just and fare God who will insure that everyone will have an opportunity to hear his word and chose for themselves. But you are probably one of those atheists who like confrontation, seizing upon every opportunity to contend, even though you don't have a clue about the subject you are trying to postulate.

And yet, God has created millions who've gone their entire lives never even having a concept of the existence of christianity. Seems they didn't have a choice, unless you believe it's possible to choose something you're not aware exists? And, not that you care, I'm not an athiest.

"God (whichever version)" is an arrogantly sarcastic and condescending taunt, and was completely unnecessary. Funny, I do tend to be sensitive to unnecessary and provocative slurs.

Holy sensitivity, it was not meant as anything close to that. Simply an acknowledgment that many approaches to religion, and belief in God, exist. Attempting to ascertain someone's emotion through an anonymous internet posting is typically a recipe for frustration, as you demonstrate very well. Clearly you are overly-sensitive to anyone challenging your beliefs. You should try to be a little thicker-skinned.

It seems as though you doubt the existence of my God. It is also patently clear and blatantly obvious that you are speaking from complete ignorance.

Yes, "your God". Yours alone. LOL. And, you know enough about this God to make all sorts of definitive and conclusive statements. You've got it all figured out. Talk about arrogance.........

 

[Serenity7855]

And yet, God has created millions who've gone their entire lives never even having a concept of the existence of christianity. Seems they didn't have a choice, unless you believe it's possible to choose something you're not aware exists? And, not that you care, I'm not an athiest.

The spirit world where Jesus went to help preach the word of God.

Holy sensitivity, it was not meant as anything close to that.

Of course not.

Yes, "your God". Yours alone. LOL. And, you know enough about this God to make all sorts of definitive and conclusive statements. You've got it all figured out. Talk about arrogance.........

I can only testify of the God I know. Yes, I know enough about this God to make all sorts of definitive and conclusive statements. Yes, I have it all figured out. Not arrogance, truth.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I am looking for someone to stump me on any aspect of Gods marvelous work and wonder to bring to pass the salvation and eternal life of mankind. If it cannot be done then even the disbelieved must concede that it is a rational and logical plan.

That's cool - because I am also looking for someone to stump me on my own logical conclusion that tiny purple dragons draw sleeping dust from the horns of unicorns and spread it over our eyes whilst we sleep - only we can't open our eyes or they'll disappear. It's a logical conclusion that I have come to by reading and listening to others who share similar beliefs and experiences... If you cannot stump me on this assertion, then it must be concluded that what I say is true.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

Matthew 10:37
"Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."
Luke 14:26
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple."

Man that is some cult techniques right there.

 

[savagewind]

Man that is some cult techniques right there.

So now you bring it around to the meaning of "hate" again. I have to wonder if they went off topic to avoid my question.
Everyone wants loyalty. Especially do family members. To be loyal to them instead of Christ is what those scriptures mean.

 

[Serenity7855]

That's cool - because I am also looking for someone to stump me on my own logical conclusion that tiny purple dragons draw sleeping dust from the horns of unicorns and spread it over our eyes whilst we sleep - only we can't open our eyes or they'll disappear. It's a logical conclusion that I have come to by reading and listening to others who share similar beliefs and experiences... If you cannot stump me on this assertion, then it must be concluded that what I say is true.

How many people follow your belief? Has your belief existed for 6,000 years, has anybody given their lives rather then denounce it? Does the purple dragons have a book of commandments read by billions? Is there a meaning for the existence of the purple dragon? Is there a plan to help fulfil that purpose? Is there historical evidence to corroborate the existence of the purple dragons son who was foreordained to come to earth to die for the sins of mankind, does the purple dragon communicate with us via his Holy spirit? And on and on and on. The typical pink spaghetti monster, leprechauns or the tooth fairy has become a lame points made by atheists who cannot put up a descent argument, so resort to silly similitude that just do not work anymore. Been there, had that and worn the tee shirt. It is stale and out of date. Try again.

It is so very interesting to see that Cephus likes this. He can normal muster up a better argument then the unicorn syndrome.

 

[Madtown]

How many people follow your belief? Has your belief existed for 6,000 years, has anybody given their lives rather then denounce it?

A few years back, a group of human beings flew airplanes into buildings because of the fervency of their beliefs, giving their lives in the process. I guess their beliefs were correct?

 

[Cephus]

How many people follow your belief? Has your belief existed for 6,000 years, has anybody given their lives rather then denounce it? Does the purple dragons have a book of commandments read by billions? Is there a meaning for the existence of the purple dragon? Is there a plan to help fulfil that purpose? Is there historical evidence to corroborate the existence of the purple dragons son who was foreordained to come to earth to die for the sins of mankind, does the purple dragon communicate with us via his Holy spirit? And on and on and on. The typical pink spaghetti monster, leprechauns or the tooth fairy has become a lame points made by atheists who cannot put up a descent argument, so resort to silly similitude that just do not work anymore. Been there, had that and worn the tee shirt. It is stale and out of date. Try again.

It is so very interesting to see that Cephus likes this. He can normal muster up a better argument then the unicorn syndrome.

You're still flogging the argumentum ad populum fallacy. Truth isn't determined by how many people believe it but by if it is actually, factually true. How many people fell for that "The Secret" hokum that Oprah was flogging? Does it make it any more or less true based on who bought the stupid book?

 

[Serenity7855]

A few years back, a group of human beings flew airplanes into buildings because of the fervency of their beliefs, giving their lives in the process. I guess their beliefs were correct?

No, they were not. What a very strange thing to say about religious extremists who intentionally killed nearly 3,000 innocent individuals.

 

[Serenity7855]

You're still flogging the argumentum ad populum fallacy. Truth isn't determined by how many people believe it but by if it is actually, factually true.

Well, I know that you know that this is fallacious. I have not made a single statement about my religion, I have asked questions about his logical conclusion, that turns out to be far from logical, in order to compare his lame psuedo purple dragon to the entire rational and logical Plan of Redemption. As in "How many people follow your belief?" They are question intended to get a better understanding of his logical conclusion and not mine.

How many people fell for that "The Secret" hokum that Oprah was flogging? Does it make it any more or less true based on who bought the stupid book?

Personally I prefer the case of cigarette smokers. One could claim that smoking is a healthy pastime, since millions of people do it. However, knowing the dangers of smoking, we instead say that smoking is not a healthy pastime despite the fact that millions do it. I know nothing about Oprah's book. I am also not smoking cigarettes. I am eating healthy fruit for the soul, so, argumentum ad populum does not apply here as Christianity is not bad for your health, on the contrary, it produces well round morally accountable individuals who are an asset to our communities and society.

In this case it is considered to be a majority rule or a general consensus. To say that 2.2 billion Christians cannot all be wrong is an accurate statement to make as it could be equally true or false, there is no set answer. It is, therefore, not an appeal to numbers but it is evidence that there could be validity in the belief, or not. The validity is only valid to the believer but the false conclusion is only relevant to the atheists. There are 1.1 billion non - believers in our world. So twice as many people believe christianity is right then think it is false. With no absolute definitive answer numbers are an important factor as we know that the answer could be either true or false.

Incidentally, there are approximately 7.4 billion human beings on this planet. 2.2 are Christians, 1.1 are atheists and 4.1 billion believe in other supernatural metaphysical entities. That equates to 15% being non-believers and 85% believing in something.

 

[Sapiens]

Well, I know that you know that this is fallacious. I have not made a single statement about my religion, I have asked questions about his logical conclusion, that turns out to be far from logical, in order to compare his lame psuedo purple dragon to the entire rational and logical Plan of Redemption. As in "How many people follow your belief?" They are question intended to get a better understanding of his logical conclusion and not mine.



Personally I prefer the case of cigarette smokers. Millions of people smoke cigarettes but we know that smoking cigarettes is bad for your health. In this case it does not make it right to smoke cigarettes just because millions of other people smoke them. I know nothing about Oprah's book. I am also not smoking cigarettes. I am eating healthy fruit for the soul, so, argumentum ad populum does not apply here as Christianity is not bad for your health, on the contrary, it produces well round morally accountable individuals who are an asset to our communities and society.

The problem is that y our analogy is no good. Cigarettes have been shown, through science, to be harmful to you. There is no science of any repute that demonstrated that Christianity, "produces well round morally accountable individuals who are an asset to our communities and society." Some are, some are war criminals and mass murders ... most Christians are, in my experience, somewhere in between.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

So now you bring it around to the meaning of "hate" again. I have to wonder if they went off topic to avoid my question.
Everyone wants loyalty. Especially do family members. To be loyal to them instead of Christ is what those scriptures mean.

I mention nothing of hate.

I just pointed out the parallels between those two verses and the cult recruitment technique of separating a cult member from their family.

Cult Indoctrination - HowStuffWorks

 

[Serenity7855]

I mention nothing of hate.

I just pointed out the parallels between those two verses and the cult recruitment technique of separating a cult member from their family.

Cult Indoctrination - HowStuffWorks

Actually, I believe your comparison is sound. People in cults are just as loyal to their leader as the disciples were to Jesus. Indeed, both situation require strict adherence to the loyalty of their leader.

 

[Cephus]

Well, I know that you know that this is fallacious. I have not made a single statement about my religion, I have asked questions about his logical conclusion, that turns out to be far from logical, in order to compare his lame psuedo purple dragon to the entire rational and logical Plan of Redemption. As in "How many people follow your belief?" They are question intended to get a better understanding of his logical conclusion and not mine.

You have yet to prove there is a "rational and logical Plan of Redemption", you just keep repeating it as though you'd actually demonstrated something. How many people believe a thing is entirely irrelevant to it's fact value. If one person believes a fact, it remains a fact. If a billion people believe a lie, it remains a lie.

Personally I prefer the case of cigarette smokers. One could claim that smoking is a healthy pastime, since millions of people do it. However, knowing the dangers of smoking, we instead say that smoking is not a healthy pastime despite the fact that millions do it. I know nothing about Oprah's book. I am also not smoking cigarettes. I am eating healthy fruit for the soul, so, argumentum ad populum does not apply here as Christianity is not bad for your health, on the contrary, it produces well round morally accountable individuals who are an asset to our communities and society.

The Secret was a book about positive thinking, if you wish hard enough for something, you'll get it. That kind of thing. Millions of people bought into it. It never worked worth a darn. You are simply asserting that you are eating healthy fruit for the soul, just like someone could be asserting that smoking is healthy. Because neither of you have produced a shred of evidence that your assertions are factually true, there's no reason to take either of you seriously. In fact, I would argue that Christianity is indeed bad for your health, there are plenty of cases where parents refuse medical treatment for their children which leads to their deaths. It is also bad for one's mental health and emotional health because it leads people to view reality in a skewed manner. Frankly, I don't think you can make a case for Christians being morally accountable or assets to communities when you can find lots of Christians who are racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. I wouldn't find a lot of hard core Christians to be moral in any way, shape or form, in fact, because of their beliefs, they don't even comprehend how morality works.

In this case it is considered to be a majority rule or a general consensus. To say that 2.2 billion Christians cannot all be wrong is an accurate statement to make as it could be equally true or false, there is no set answer. It is, therefore, not an appeal to numbers but it is evidence that there could be validity in the belief, or not. The validity is only valid to the believer but the false conclusion is only relevant to the atheists. There are 1.1 billion non - believers in our world. So twice as many people believe christianity is right then think it is false. With no absolute definitive answer numbers are an important factor as we know that the answer could be either true or false.

Of course they can all be wrong. The only way for them to be demonstrably right is to produce evidence for the factual existence of their God. Until they can do that, they're just as liable to be wrong as anyone else.

Incidentally, there are approximately 7.4 billion human beings on this planet. 2.2 are Christians, 1.1 are atheists and 4.1 billion believe in other supernatural metaphysical entities. That equates to 15% being non-believers and 85% believing in something.

The majority of people once believed the Earth was flat. They were all wrong too. Try again.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No, they were not. What a very strange thing to say about religious extremists who intentionally killed nearly 3,000 innocent individuals.

Hmm... Old Testament is full of them.

 

[Sapiens]

...

The majority of people once believed the Earth was flat. They were all wrong too. Try again.

The majority, but not of sailors, who knew better based on the naturalistic evidence of their own eyes.