Why so friggin' confident?

DA writes:DA do you enjoy being a wife beater, Im not looking for a rationalization just strickly yes or no.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Bluesbrothers writes:Laughing really hard while reading. Blues you are a trip, I swear. Your posts are very comical to me.Bertot

Nedster writer:Ofcourse its not the same knothead, but the principle is the same, he trying to manuver John into a nonsensical question that would ofcourse require some explanation like the one I asked.D Bertot

Brian wrotes:Nice piece of evidence you presented there Brian. But my suggestion to you would be to quit presenting examples of evidence and just keep maintaning that all of this in the scriptures was a myth and that it has no historical content or context. Thanks again for yet more confirmation of its validity. And exacally what is the name of this stone?D Bertot

Ned writes:Ya think?You guys are an enigma to me sometimes, at times you can appear so intelligent and other times dumber than a fence post. DAs question would have no relevance Ned, if John was not indicating that God had ask him to do this, correct? DA is presenting a scenario that does not exist and does not apply to John.D Bertot

Mod writes:"Next day edit", thats funny, your always so official Mod. Do you still have the hangar in your shirt while your wearing it, ha ha, anywho. You are incorrect Mod it is very much a thread about me getting you to believe. Also, to believe in what belief is or is not. If you agree that belief in God is necessary to belief in the miraculous, then certainly you can see how these two constitute not olny evidence in such, but why we are so confident. Further, as we have seen there is very little comparison to the scriptures and any other source that equates God and the miraculous. Remember our Koran and Bible scenario? If you dont like that one give me another. There you go again Mod letting your humanism shine through.Certainly they are a collection of writings provided by insipration and intervention of an omnipotent God. Anyone certainly can manipulate, exclude or include things that are not inspired at various times and places in history. This no indication that the truth is not present in the fashion and method that God has chosen for it. Error always exists along side the truth. The ones that are discarded usually show themselves to be inconsistent with the history of the others that were believed to be the truth from the beginning.Take the NT for example. It is no conincidence that you can reproduce nearly 98% of the Now existing books of the NT in the earliest church fathers. They knew early on what writings should be attributed to what authors and what the events actually were, much in the same way if we were to presently collect the writings of poets from 1800 to the present. In other words there would be no real disagreement. Try the same thing 2000 years from now, with the people of that day.Now add to this its history, historical accuracy, textual purity to the earliest known scrolls, like that of Isaiah, the care taken by scribes, of people that believed they were handling and transcribing Gods Word and other evidences, coupled with the guidance of the Holy Spirit."Do not worry what you will say when you come before kings and rulers, it will be given to you in that hour"."howbeit, when he the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you into all truth and show you things to come"Mod, this is what the scriptures mean when it says, "the NATURAL man recieves not the things of the Spirit, they are spiritually undecernable". Not that you cant understand mentally, but that you reject even the obvious evidence of his existence, thereby disallowing the miraculous or trust that God can accomplish such small tasks as keeping his truth in tact over a few centuries. It may very well be true that some portion of evidence is missing or lacking due to misunderstanding of history, purposely discarded by God or the intervention of the miraclulous in those instances. Forgive me for laughing while I read the above two paragraphs,but I can just see that hangar sticking you in the back while your writing, not that you shouldnt be critical, but surely you understand that there has to be a reason to suspect collusion, before can be suspected or attributed. What would be the reason you make this assertion in the first place. Can you provide a reason that motivate them to create a story that is going to bring only miery and death. To go along with your analogy, if they were arrested, why maintain the lie, if beatings and death were the end of thier collusion? This seems to make no logical sense.Secondly, if as you indicated earlier that only the people after them believed in a lie, then I would point out that you would need to again demonstrate that they did not exist as the people they saythey were, they did not wittness those events and that there is some specific reason for collusion other than you dont like thier story. The problem with your example here Modulous is that, it is the teacher, police officer, parent and nearly every other professional or lay person that believe these things, that is, the vast majority. Now why would the vast majority of people believe in God if there were no good reason Modulous? Or when they are challenged by opposing views of atheism, they go away seeing no reason still to reject such an obvious conclusion? Please, no speeches about fear of death, fear of the unknown, I am speaking about people in thier everyday walks of life, with no present threats. Obviously these people are aware of the collective evidence at hand.The only PAUSE is by those that apply standards that are so ludicrous, that they dont even use them in thier own affairs, practices or beliefs. Or when they use them they do so to avoid CONCLUSIONS, which would require them to give an explanation for the scientifically derived evidences, of say biological evolution. "Science doesnt worry about those conclusions". My confidence in the miraculous in the scriptures is excally the same and more in the exmples you provide. If not please provide the distinction that would cause me to discard it verses the examples you provided. Example I know the earth exists because I can see and experience it. In this same way I can know that finite contingent materials, with beginings and ends cannot be product of themselves no matter how much our experiental abilities take us.Unless inspiration is involved, 2000 thousand years from now it may be highly questionable or believed that Lincoln was shot by JWB, in Fords theater, even if he is believed to have been president. The wittnesses to these events may be called into question and doubted.You must first demonstrate a CLEAR reason for collusion to use it as an example of disbelief, this you have not done. You simply dont like thier accuracy in many areas and say it must be collusion. Got anything better? I agree, and the same would go for lies and collusion, correct? What makes you think they were not eyew/ or reliable, assuming you think they were real characters in the first place, or is that a problem too? The first three words in this paragraph are indicative of your biases before you start your thinking process. I think you are starting to see the difference in the expression, "even if I accepted that YHWH of the OT is a real entity and if I accepted that Jesus is a miracle worker" and actually believing it, make all the difference in the world and will provide you with the conduit that you need for a proper understanding.Ill let any reader decide for themselves whether I have provided a step by step understanding of a confident belief in these matters.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Ned writes:So now you want to get specific with specific words, eh. Did you notice that you said, "MAY WELL apply to John", which means it does NOT, since he has not told you directly or indirectly that God or any voice has to told him to do such a thing.Devils Advocate is trying to apply a situation or scenario to John that is not applicable. He then tries to make John answer his imiaginary scenario in a Yes or No context, to make it appear that John has actually experienced such a situation. It is a nonsensical question designed to create obvious prejudice.It is same situation in which I would ask someone if they liked being a wife beater, even if I did not know or had knowledge of such. My question and the way I am forcing them to answer it can only create one answer, if explanation is not allowed. If I am incorrect please provide the post where John has indicated God asked him to carry out such a command.DA asked him the question, not God. There is nothing really wrong with DAs question its the manner in which he is askingor forcing him to answer it. Imagine if I said to DA, "would you be willing to follow an order of a naval superior (I know thats a contradiction of terms) to kill someone". Then I said, I dont need any explanation or rationalization, just answer it yes or no. Ofcourse I could be meaning an inocent bystander or anyone not needing to be shot, correct?D BertotD BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Devil writesYou have got to be kidding me DA, no one is afraid to answer this or anyother questions posed by you fellas tyro logic. Its the manner in which you forced him to answer the question, not allowing any explanation or reasons why that may or may not happen. My responses in this connection were more than adequate, so that even a bafoon could understand my meaning and implication. You did not indicate thatyou were willing for John to have a follow on answer. This is not the original question you asked him to answer, as you have now modified it. You provide that now to cover up that fact. Your specific statement was, "Now I dont need any rationalization, just a simple yes or no will suffice" You are back tracking at this point to make yourself and your original comment sound relevant now. Then your question directly to him was unwarrented and irrelevant. Further, By forcing him to answer it, in the manner in whih you requested or demanded, makes even less sense and you have the nerve to call someone else clueless.As I have been on here two years now, it should be obvious that myself, ICANT, Jaywill and any others that stand here and fight, are more than willing to answer any and all questions posed. Your character asasinations and verbage are indicative of a deeper motive, more than they exhibit your interest in the truth or someone elses opinion. We simply let these insults and belittling go by the wayside.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Percy writes:This is a total misrepresentation of the principles I have been advocating and you know it.D Bertot

Brian writes:Actually it is yourself and the other secular fundamentalists here that reconfirm that you have nothing in the way reasons not to accept the more than foundational and evidential beliefs that support Christianinty. Any thinking person can see that your positions and hatred for even the idea of God much less christianity are your motivations, yet you can provide no valid reasons why we should abandon that belief. You simply dismiss the evidence as if it doesnt exist.If every item of every stroy of every incident could be confirmed historically or archeologically you would still dismiss any connection with God or the miraculous.. The point is that, its not due to a lack of evidence, its due to a hatred of anything connected with the idea of God or the supernatural. Im sure our viewers and readers (those following along) can see this over and over in your responses.But hey, Brian, you just keep right on blameing the Theists and Christians for your attitude, maybe no one will notice. What would your objective material evidence be for this One True God. Or is this just another lousy shot as usual?D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Admin writes:Thanks for the chance to close this from our position. As I read throught the previous closures, it became painfully obvious that there was nothing new here, not just in the closures but broadly in the assertions, the same worn out broken down tripe that gives no cause to abandon the best of evidence, not only for Gods existence but that of the scriprutes as well. I have heard it now for nearly 55 years and it offers nothing is comparison to that of reality. It is not necessary to rehearse all the arguments we have set out only to very carefully point out thaat:These fellas (atheistic humanists) make up about, what is it, 3 to 4 % of the population and it has been this way since the beginning of time. Now I can believe that all of the thousands (majority) of people over the thousands of years suffer from delusion or mass hesteria or I can believe there are little select group of clownish individulas, that ignore obvious evidence, in favor of a posittion that offers no explanations for anything, but is very adept at expalining everything, but ignoring all of its obvious reason, sources or causes. Or even pretending that causation ois not relevant. In other words why would I or anyone be satisfied with how atree works, but also be satisfied with no explanation for its source or cause. This is what this select group of clownish little men offer anyone. Yet we are to consider hem the select group of intellectualsBesides not offering any counterfatual hypothesis to already existing evidence, they or thier position never have a serious impact on society or the changing of mens minds, because what they puppose and what they offer, besides being ridiculous and foolish, provides nothing in the way of explanations. They ofcourse, hope no one pays any attention to this painful fact. Fortunately, most rational and intelligent people are aware of this fact and the class of people that disregard thier blathering range from great to small in intelligence Which is a indication that the evidence is so obvious that any thinking person (That is one not abandoning reason) can easily see the truth.Theres no great trick to ignoring reality as these so-called intellectuals do, all one has to do is bury ones head and say, well I just dont see that at all. They may even have a case if it were not for the fact that the best of minds through the years have chose not to ignore this obvious evidence and supported it with all of thier intellect. Who would call F.F. Bruce, C.S. Lewis and many other notable intellectuals, uninformed? So if intellect is not the reason, what must be the reason these fellas adopt the positions they do?. One literally has to abandon reason to come to such conclusions about Gods non-existence, no evidence supporting it and such and the positions about the scriptures. Once one does this it becomes a free for all, they proceed as if they have removed all the solid evidence for such reasons, when in fact all they have done is ignored it."For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God or gave him thanks, but they became vain in thier imaginations and thier FOOLISH hearts were darkened, professing themselves to be WISE, they became FOOLS, and changed (replaced the creator) the glory of the incorruptible God, with that of fourfooted, beasts and creapting things. Even when they did not like to RETAIN God in thier knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do and think those things which are not normal.. THEY EXCHANGE THE TRUTH OF (OR ABOUT) God for a lie." Romans chapter 1.You see theres no trick or great effort to ignoring truth, you simply have to make a decision to do so. Isnt it interesting how relevant this truth is today, even as it was thousnads of years ago. These arrogant little men beleive that because they have discovered a few facts concering the universe and the nature of things, that this is reason to proclaim, "we need no God for our conclusions, we will figure it out on our own" and they dont even have a clue about whats around the first turn. Certainly, arrogance of this nature is matched only by its stupidity.Lastly in this connection it should be noted that persons of this persuation are degenerates of the highest form and order. Now I dont mean degenerate in a sexual perversness, I mean it in the sense they have abandoned all REASON in favor of a position with none. Degenerate in the thinking process, so unobjective they are blind to reality.There is no other explanation why individuals would spend so much time defending or defending against somethhing they dont even believe in. They are hoping against all hope that these things are not true, they need them to not be true in thier minds, so it will provide a comfort ignoring reality. Surely if these things are not true, one should not be so threated by them, or is it that they do see evidence and choose to ignore it?Why would anyone in their RIGHT MIND abandon reality and reason for the skeptics sea of emptiness and willful stupidity? Not ignoring the fact they cannot offer any valid reasons to ignore the present evidence.In conclusion: what does atheism say, nothing, what does atheism offer, nothing, what does atheism do, nothing. What does atheism provide,nothing. In short, what is atheism and skepticism, NOTHING.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Admin writes:Why would I repeat and duplicate arguments to which no one has provided an adequate answer?Oh, On the contrary admin demi god, please let them respond, we encourage any and all attempts at reason to overthrow these obvious facts of reality. Besides this you had no problem at taking a shot, why not them? Or if you are implying that I may respond to thier last attempts at arguments, Iwould lkie that as well and I know that ICANT, John and Jaywill would love it also.D Bertot

Off topic reply hidden. If you do that again Bertot you will get a suspension.Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given.

Kap writes:My friend, whoever you may be, do you not find this very impressive indeed. Thanks for the site, it was a different than the ones I had viewed years back, but impressive nonetheless. Will we quible about percentages? I think the point is made very wellPeople are free to believe whatever they wish, thats how free will works.Again, thanksD BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

RAZD writes:While I am fully aware of the format for debate in the area of summation, I see or feel no need to repeat numerous valid points, whichany can go back and read if they choose. I also feel no need to repeat it for people that are not listening. As exhibit A, I present this very insightful and brilliant comment from Brian in another post.Brian writes:Now does that sound like anyone that is interested in any truth whatsoever. I would make my bets that yourself and the others are not far behind in this type of evasion and ignorance. Why repeat myself? My goal in summationwas simply to pointout further why you proceed in the manner you do and offer reasons for this type of degenerative thinking pattern.As I very easily demonstrated in another post you unwillingness to accept any of the evidence is not due to a lack of evidence, its that your methods and approach to what belief and evidence are are nothing short or ignorance and wilfull stupidity. As I suspected before I made the comment to Brian, he turns right around and confirms it in no uncertain terms.RAZD writes:Like Brian, my simple friend, your not interested in evidence or the truth and your not listening to reality or our arguments, you have abandonded reason and your head is buried in your nonsensical approach."There comes a time when even learned men must learn to dance".Reality and a rational approach to belief, RAZD, are the dance instructors, just listen.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.