The Creationist's Argument and its Greatest Weakness

[BilliardsBall]

Ah so, the fault is in those who point out your
falsehoods, not in you.

Far from cleaning up your act that discredits
you and your faith both, you want people to
just accept whatever you make up about them?

Have you, like, considered not doing it anymore?
Quit making things up and sing a true tune?

Q about "god"? I would not ask you.

You' ve no credibility, even if
there were a god.

So, your response to "do you have anything to say other than accusations and ad homs" is more of the same?

I say I apologize to you if I've offended you in any way. Do you accept my apology so we can move on or not?

 

[BilliardsBall]

EXACTLY! Remember, we were talking about the sacrifice that God made by allowing his only begotten son etc, blah, blah, blah.

I'm glad you admit that it really wasn't much of a sacrifice.





"Ripped apart"? My you do have a flair for the dramatic. What was ripped apart? God created a subset of himself in a separate place (earth).


Are you "perfect/sinless/clean"? I guess that was another part of God's plan that didn't work out as He, with His omniscience, thought it would.



Well, for one thing, skeptics don't believe a single word of it. Therefore, no double standard on our part.

You however, get all teary eyed at God's momentary suffering but praise God for horrifically killing almost all of humanity by drowning them or burying them alive in mudslides. That's the epitome of a double standard.

I think you don't go far enough--God will kill every single person at some point, not just in water or mudslides. Therefore, I cling fast to His guarantee to perfect me in the future. Why? Because no one can be in a moral utopia who is imperfect, ruining it. There is some sanctification in my life now, more later.

And per your notes above, God created a subset on Earth, which DIED. The Son separated from the Father, tasting death for us.

 

[Audie]

So, your response to "do you have anything to say other than accusations and ad homs" is more of the same?

I say I apologize to you if I've offended you in any way. Do you accept my apology so we can move on or not?

Stating the facts is not an accusation, and
your cry of "ad hom" is phony, though to be fair,
you dont seem to know what it means. Do look it
up, you and the legion of others who try to use the
concept never seem to understand it.

The closest you come is that you sort of make one
against me-dismissing all I say, with a reference
to my character.

I am not offended, I you do not have the capacity
to offend me.

There is no apology called for, none accepted.

Just quit making things up, and you will hear no
more about it. Or, quit presenting that you are
somehow interested in "truth" or any other
aspect of reality. Either will do, but they do not
go well together.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You're possibly right. Scourging and beatings, then death by torture for hours, isn't a big deal, even though it was focused on one person. That one person didn't really suffer for anyone else, even though He was innocent, pure. Thanks for clarifying this.

Not in the grand scheme of things. Three days of torture in exchange for eternity at the right hand of God.

 

[Audie]

Not in the grand scheme of things. Three days of torture in exchange for eternity at the right hand of God.

It was a few hours not three days.

Re "innocent" Jesus was far from that.

Fomenting revolt against the Roman Empire was
a capital offense.

Everybody knew that. No surprise, when it
gets someone in trouble.

In combat, it long has been a capital offense
to run instead of fight. Shoot them dead if they try to run.

The means of execution in Roman days was
nasty, true, but it may have saved a few lives,
for lo, seeing it might give one pause about
rebelling. That is why they did it, after all.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It was a few hours not three days.

Re "innocent" Jesus was far from that.

Fomenting revolt against the Roman Empire was
a capital offense.

Everybody knew that. No surprise, when it
gets someone in trouble.

In combat, it long has been a capital offense
to run instead of fight. Shoot them dead if they try to run.

The means of execution in Roman days was
nasty, true, but it may have saved a few lives,
for lo, seeing it might give one pause about
rebelling. That is why they did it, after all.

That's right. Pardon me. Thanks for the correction.

 

[Audie]

That's right. Pardon me. Thanks for the correction.

Dont thank me for being pedantic,
I will become insufferable

 

[viole]

You're possibly right. Scourging and beatings, then death by torture for hours, isn't a big deal, even though it was focused on one person. That one person didn't really suffer for anyone else, even though He was innocent, pure. Thanks for clarifying this.

Your welcome.

My recommendation is to say “He suffered for our sins” instead of “He died for our sins”. Less melodramatic, but closer to the truth. At least, if we take that mythology at face value.

Ciao

-viole

 

[BilliardsBall]

Your welcome.

My recommendation is to say “He suffered for our sins” instead of “He died for our sins”. Less melodramatic, but closer to the truth. At least, if we take that mythology at face value.

Ciao

-viole

Actually, the Bible says "suffered, died and rose" for our justification. You are unjustified apart from Jesus IMHO.

 

[viole]

N

Actually, the Bible says "suffered, died and rose" for our justification. You are unjustified apart from Jesus IMHO.

Big deal.
I would also have suffered, died (for a few days) and rose to return as the ruler of the Universe. Especially if I knew that in advance, as the myth book seems to indicate.

And the sacrifice is ....?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Subduction Zone]

N


Big deal.
I would also have suffered died for a few days and rose to return as the ruler of the Universe. Especially if I knew that in advance, as the myth book seem to indicate.

And the sacrifice is?

Ciao

- viole

A rough weekend with a terrible hangover.

 

[BilliardsBall]

N


Big deal.
I would also have suffered, died (for a few days) and rose to return as the ruler of the Universe. Especially if I knew that in advance, as the myth book seems to indicate.

And the sacrifice is ....?

Ciao

- viole

Putting up patiently with skeptics. That's what I sacrifice daily.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Putting up patiently with skeptics. That's what I sacrifice daily.

Do you think there's something wrong in being skeptical?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you think there's something wrong in being skeptical?

Or learning? Oh wait, he does not appear to have done that yet.

 

[ecco]

Putting up patiently with skeptics. That's what I sacrifice daily.

I'm tempted to say: Nothing's keeping you here.
I'm tempted to say: You must enjoy the flagellation.
I'm tempted to say: We appreciate your sacrifice.
I'm tempted to say: If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
But, instead, I'll just say: Aww.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Do you think there's something wrong in being skeptical?

No, but there's something wrong in behaving like an embittered skeptic, de facto, comes with the territory of trolling on a religious forum. Let me help you:

1) There is no god.

2) You are SURE.

3) Feel free to leave the forum and live your life.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I'm tempted to say: Nothing's keeping you here.
I'm tempted to say: You must enjoy the flagellation.
I'm tempted to say: We appreciate your sacrifice.
I'm tempted to say: If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
But, instead, I'll just say: Aww.

1) There is no god.

2) You are certain.

3) You define self-flagellation, therefore, by remaining here.

4) I release you from your chain, feel free to leave the forum, and live your life!

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, but there's something wrong in behaving like an embittered skeptic, de facto, comes with the territory of trolling on a religious forum. Let me help you:

1) There is no god.

2) You are SURE.

3) Feel free to leave the forum and live your life.

Which skeptic or atheist has said those things in this thread? I don't recall saying there is no god and I'm SURE of it.

Just out of curiosity ...
Are you skeptical of Hindu claims? Are you sure that there are no Hindu gods?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Which skeptic or atheist has said those things in this thread? I don't recall saying there is no god and I'm SURE of it.

Just out of curiosity ...
Are you skeptical of Hindu claims? Are you sure that there are no Hindu gods?

Hindu and other claims reflect the divine reality, in terms of even the pantheon of Hindu gods has one supreme being over all other lesser powers.

I'm skeptical of Hindu claims of reincarnation, as I've discussed here on recent threads.

I'm glad you are not an apatheist and unsure about your atheist faith.

 

[Audie]

Beats there anywhere the heart of a
religionist who does not succumb to the tawdry
vice of equivocation with the word "faith"?