Claims of God Being Omnipotent in the Bible

What did you consider to be the insults and innuendo? I'm hard pressed to see anything like that in his post or on the first page of his web site.This is not an accusation. I probably missed something. Wow RAZD.

Did you read the whole paragraph?

quote:

---

Second, and perhaps a bigger issue is that there is no "Christian God^TM". Speaking as a Christian. the God that Calvinists try to market is vile, evil, unworthy of worship. The God marketed by the Christian Cult of Ignorance such as seen in the Chick Tracts is just pitiful and laughable.

---

Almost every chapter of Club Christian markets another and quite different god. But that has no meaning and tells us nothing. Perhaps if you bring in that object and place it on the table to be examined but the evidence so far says "No it is not possible". The Calvinists market a vile, evil Christian god that elects who will be saved. The CCoI markets a not very bright conman Christian god who fakes all the evidence so the earth looks old and humans look like just more primates. Many Christians claim the Christian god they market is the real god but the ones Jews (they market their fair share of different gods) or Muslims market are not GOD.

Sure, but they don't "obey" their parents. They learned their values from their parents but they make their own decisions.

He's not writing generally about "how to debate", but specifically: "How to win religious debates against atheists' typical arguments".Some of the stuff he says is decent advice, but it seems to all boil down to being motivated by proselytizing.So for me, its pretty pointless. My thought was: "who the hell cares? Why should "winning" against atheists be anything I care about?" And then I realized: Oh yeah, I'm not evangelical.

It's okay.
If you apply yourself and drink your milk, you'll get there one day

Is it the milk, or the application of myself, that gets me around my severe case of apathy?

quote:

---

I'm pretty sure that djufo's point is neither that he does not believe in George Washington, nor that he requires direct evidence. His point is that all of those contemporary writers are dead. What we have left at this point is writings and artifacts. Yet we all believe in George Washington and disbelieve that the Sumerians were taught by aliens.

---

I don't know what djufo thinks except by what he writes. If he meant to use this as an analogy it was poorly constructed. The contemporary writers of the Founding Fathers are dead, but we have their original works in their own hand. We have the letters of the Founding Fathers in their own hand. We have contemporary painters and sculpters who fashioned likenesses of the Founding Fathers while they lived. We have eyewitness testimony corroborating these events. The preponderance of the evidence for their existence is overwhelming. Now please apply that same standard to Jesus Christ, for example. There are no independent verifications of his existence. There are the anonymous and apochryphal Gospels, but they are without verification or corroboration. There are no contemporaneous historical accounts, although there were historians living in and around Jerusalem at the same time as the events depicted in the Gospels. There are no paintings or sculptural renderings of anything equated with Jesus that were contemporaneous with him. Bart Ehrman has made a study of this issue and as a historian has come to the conclusion that the Jesus figure in the Bible is mostly mythical. In fact there is as much evidence for Hercules as there is for Jesus Christ, but few people suggest that he existed.Edited by MFFJM2, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed quote

Perhaps they dont obey their parents, but chances are that in many ways they follow the example that their parents set. In other ways they don't.I suppose that the arguments can be broken down into questions.Were humans meant to think for themselves and write their own law, or was a law given to us at one time, broadened now into an age of grace.FYI I don't agree with the philosophy that we are to correct God....at least not the One we have now. We are charged to correct ourselves and try and do our best, but it is unclear what it means to be in communion with God, allowing His Grace to make it possible and whether or not He empowers us to improve our laws and gives us grace to face ourselves in the mirror as a culture.

But what does the Bible say?In the Bible (all Canons) God struggles with the issue that morality, right & wrong, are seldom clear and concrete and that mankind has the say capabilities of questioning right and wrong as God does.

It is indeed unclear because, as I have pointed out to you repeatedly, those who claim to be in communion with God often do a poorer job of correcting themselves than those who are not. What's the point of the communion if His advice doesn't take hold?

You can lead a church to (Living) Water but you can't make them drink.

Good one. But then what's the point of leading them?

It beats trying to sell them gold chains and holy water online.. God foreknew that Lucifer would rebel, but He never made him rebel.A leader may suspect that most of the people in his step study class wont listen to him, but he is charged to try and do his best anyway.

dupeEdited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Two things.First, you yourself denigrated the value of eye witness testimony in your post. Not sure what the purpose is of trying to re-elevate it here.Second, the comparison at hand is not to Jesus Christ, but to whoever djufo claims informed the Sumerians. Which appears to mean only that you missed the point. I think it is quite obvious that djufo was engaging in analogy.