Testing The Christian Apologists

Sometimes you have to make eye contact or they won't even ask. You know, treat them like a human being. They're used to being stepped on. They can tell who's likely to give them a buck or two and maybe even talk about the weather for a minute - and who's likely to pretend not to see them. I feel better when I give than when I don't.(My mother used to tell us: Be nice to people. You might be talking to an angel.)

Then you completely missed the point of what my mother said. She meant that you wouldn't recognize them. Look at the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

I couldn't care less what God appreciates. And if somebody does unto me as they would have me do unto them, I couldn't care less whether they do it out of "selfless love" or just because it's the decent thing to do. I doubt it. A lot of them have experience with hell-hole churches like the one that you went to.

I wouldn't use that definition. I haven't said that all truth is relative. On the outcome of their actions. I had to read that twice. It seems unlikely that some goober named Peter Kreeft would be right about anything, based on the previous quotes. But I suspect that some goober named Peter Kreeft has strange ideas about "what actually is." Well, a lot of civilizations HAVE fallen apart. Has some goober named Peter Kreeft ever heard of history? And all of them have had DIFFERENT "absolute truths". It's truths agreed on by each individual society that hold civilizations together. When those truths inevitably change, civilizations decay and fall apart. Apparently, some goober named Peter Kreeft is too young to remember when stop signs were yellow.Hmmpf. That was easy. And for absolutists, the "absolute truth" is conveniently what THEY recognize to be true. Nope. You're making the mistake of assuming dualism. Relative truth, by it's very nature, encompasses all truth from everybody-in-the-known-universe-recognizes-it-as-truth to nobody-in-the-known-universe-recognizes-it-as-truth. It cannot be an opposite. It cannot HAVE an opposite. Yup. And that's obviously true. For me, it's true that the best flavor of ice cream is chocolate - but it isn't true for everybody. Our freedom was given to us by God. The one who turns a child loose in a workshop full of power tools is evil. The child is not. Some goober named Peter Kreeft doesn't understand the meaning of "all-powerful". Indeed it is a self-contradiction - by some goober named peter Kreeft. He tries to make an argument for an all-powerful God by making an argument against an all-powerful God. Well, you've pretty much quoted some goober named Peter Kreeft word-for-word.We've been through all this before. Some goober named Peter Kreeft is not helping you.

I'm not a contrarian. I only point out the most egregious errors. I did suggest that he's an idiot - or didn't you pick up on that? It just so happens that what you quoted was more idiotic than lies. I see no evidence that he respects the book. That remains to be seen. Irrelevant. Lucifer is a figment of your imagination. Utter nonsense. It isn't hard. All-powerful means there is nothing He can not do. If He was all-powerful, that's EXACTLY what He could do - ANYTHING. With your version of God, we are nowhere near being free. The "choice" between heaven and hell is no choice at all.We've been through all of this before. 2 + 2 is still 4

Not at all. We're talking about a choice that is no choice. If I offer you a million dollars or a sharp stick in the eye, that's not a real choice. If your God offers heaven or hell, that's not a real choice.
​ It's all any of us can know about. Heaven is a false promise and hell is a false threat. What's bad about that? We can see it. Collectively, we may become extinct but individually we're going back to the stars. I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.ABE:I thought you wanted to discuss absolute truth. Get to it.

On the contrary, I have great respect for education - but a PhD doesn't make him right. I do have a degree. I don't mention it because it has no bearing on whether I'm right or wrong. Logic, mine or anybody else's SHOULD be considered highly. We'd all like to see you use some. Don't try to be clever. (If they brought that argument here, they would lose.) But you don't argue. You assert.Go ahead and give us an argument for thinking that Jesus is personified good and Satan is personified evil. Not at all. Every time you assert without argument that God is A or Satan is B, you're making my point. Your God and Satan are figments of your imagination and nothing else. Make an argument. You're not even defending your original assertion that it, "Depends on what power the tools have." It doesn't depend on what power the tools have. That is utter nonsense, as I said. Turning children loose in a workshop full of power tools is evil. Any sane person would agree. Adam and Eve were children. They didn't have the knowledge of good and evil. They didn't know that power tools were dangerous. They thought they were just fun toys. Children love noisy toys.But God turned them loose in the world, and what's worse, He forbade them to acquire the knowledge of good and evil. He told them not to read the manual. He withheld from them the warning that you shouldn't use the tool in the rain, you shouldn't stand on the tool and you shouldn't touch the blade when the tool is running.Turning children loose in a workshop full of power tool is evil. If you don't understand that, you don't know the first thing about evil.That's why you have no argument for your claim that God is good and Satan is evil. It's plain that God does do evil. If children didn't have to be pushed in the direction of Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, etc., they'd all believe in the same God. They don't, so somebody must be choosing a direction for them. Wrong. The logic is quite simple. If God is "all-powerful", then He has the "power" to do "all". It's right there in the word. Nothing obvious about it. Satan doesn't exist, except in your head. So it's possible that your God, if He existed, is all-powerful. It's only your theology that denies it. Why should we conclude that? I get to use the existing definitions, which is exactly what I'm doing. YOU are the one who is trying to re-define "all things" to mean "some things". Why do you need to guess? I have told you that explicitly many times. If you read my posts, you'd know that. Ain't no fallen angel. Yes, let's say that. In fact, I did say that. You say that like you haven't heard us telling you that over and over and over again.

Nice cherries.

That's a bold-faced lie. Jesus said plainly in Matthew 25 that the fake Christians go to everlasting fire. Please don't. It's a lie.

You are. Your own quote from Matthew 25 says that the fake Christians will go to everlasting fire. You can't weasel out of it by claiming that the fire wasn't "created for them." They go there no matter whom it was created for. The fake Christians, like you, who say, "Lord! Lord!" instead of DOING what He told them to do. Jesus cursed them. Nothing in Matthew 25 suggests otherwise. Jesus cursed them. It doesn't matter whom it was "meant" for. The fact is that Jesus sends humans there. That "qualifier" - i.e attempted lie - is irrelevent. SOME humans ARE sent to hell by Jesus. Case closed. No you have not. Jesus has cursed you. Your own quote says that directly: "Depart from me, you cursed." You never think. I point out your lies when you lie. Again, that's not an argument. It's an assertion. If you did think, you wouldn't say something that denies the Bible and defies logic.

I have - and that's how I know that God Himself said, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7) And God also creates evil, as He said Himself ((Isaiah 45:7).The rest of your points don't seem to fit into your "argument" at all. But Jesus DOESN"T represent personified good. If He is God and God creates evil, then He represents good AND evil. Goats - like you - PRETEND to follow Jesus - and Jesus sends them to everlasting fire. It has nothing to do with whether or not Satan exists. God Himself SAID that He creates evil (Isaiah 45:7). There is no need for any other source of evil. Wrong, as usual. I threw away each hook, line and sinker - of your theology, not of the Bible - individually, because they're individually nonsense. Maybe I serve Bob Dylan. What has that got to do with what we're talking about?Don't try to Gish-gallop me. I have answered your points and I expect a response to my answers.

I didn't Gish you. I gave a direct response. That's the opposite of Gish. The "but" in that sentence shouldn't be there. Because you can't use one book to negate another. If you're going to use any book of the Bible as a reference, you're stuck with the others too. Your Gish-gallop completely ignored what i said. And I have explained many, many, many times why that is wrong: creating the possibility of evil is exactly the same as creating evil. If He digs a tiger trap in His front yard, He is responsible for the injuries it causes. If He turns children loose in a workshop full of power tools, He is responsible for any injuries they sustain. Stop ignoring the rebuttal and address it. Been there, done that, got a closet full of T-shirts. Of course an action by a human is necessary. A human can't fall into a tiger trap without a human being present. It's the tiger trap that doesn't need to be present. The evil One who dug the tiger trap is responsible. No. You are not allowed to deny one part of the book that you don't like and then rely on another part of the book that you do like. You have to be honest. He was weaseling. He asked why somebody called Him good and said that only God is good (Matthew 19:17). He also said, "I and my Father are one." (John 10:30) Those claims can not both be "true". What else can you conclude? Give an argument, for once. But He never "commands" you to do anything you don't want to do. "Soldier! We gotta take that hill! So if it isn't too much trouble, if you can work it into your schedule, would you mind going over there and shooting at the enemy? Pretty please?" That kind of "command" isn't too hard to take. Then I can't win the argument because He doesn't exist so He can't send you to hell. Well, it kinda has. The dead will be judged on what they have already done. You will be judged on what you have already done (or not done). You might be able to do enough good in the rest of your life to outweigh the bad you have done in the past (and the good that you have not done in the past). Your "salvation" (from God) depends on God's grace (whim). I just finished saying that. You contradict yourself.And by the way, since we don't know who are goats and who are sheep, you can not claim that you are already "saved". You have not demonstrated that my reading has any lameness. It's an exact, literal reading, You have to interpret it through a lot of hoops to get any other reading. He did.He who creates evil is evil. That makes no sense. Try again in English. Sure. Why not? I can defend the message without believing the characters existed. Look at Aesop's fables. The talking animals never existed but the morals of the stories still have value.And I have more respect for the Bible fables than you do. I WILL trot out the argument until you understand that it is true. SHOW that it is lame. And I suppose I can't fly to Paris on a plane that was designed by humans, built by humans and piloted by humans.Seriously, do you think at all before you write nonsense like that? Do you read it after you wrote it to see if it has a germ of sense?ALL books are written by humans. By your logic, all books are useless. Funny! You gallop off in all directions accusing me of Gish-galloping instead of addressing what I said. That's more like YOU Gish-galloping (again). Thanks for the compliment. I have also become like God (Genesis 3:22). Well, forgive me for presenting my side of the argument. I'd argue your side but it doesn't make any sense. I mentioned Genesis 3 just above. I mention it quite often but you never address it. You can expect till the cows come home. I'll address it when/if you tie it into what we're discussing. They're both just your wishful thinking. Your Jesus is entirely made up and has no connection to what little we know about a "historical Jesus". You're wrong to throw away the historical record, however thin, and make up your own alternative facts.As for the Beast, you're wrong to assume that the Revelation has any basis in reality.

You might be able to sell that as a bumper sticker but it's obviously false. The most evil people don't die sooner than the most good people.

quote:

---

Only the good die young -- Billy Joel

---

Which falsifies your bumper sticker. What does that have to do with what you quoted? You're saying again that your god is not omnipotent - i.e. he doesn't have a monopoly on power. Yeah, the neighbor kids fall into the tiger trap "for their own good." We have noted many, many, many, many, many, many, many times that they are exactly the same. Nobody but you is saying anything about "completeness". God HIMSELF said He creates evil, so the idea that He is only good is a non-starter. What was partial about it? He said they wouldn't die the same day and they didn't. You're bound to misunderstand Him if you deny His exact words. Does he also agree that water is wet? And you have lost that argument every time. Any court in the land is going to call your tiger trap an attractive nuisance and hold YOU responsible for creating it.Stop blaming the victims. YES! Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes! You are being dishonest! See the dozens of times it has been explained to you! The one who creates the problem is responsible!

But of course that isn't true. Like Abraham, who was unfaithful to his wife and tried to kill his son? Like Isaac, who cheated his brother out of his inheritance? Like Jacob, who was unfaithful to his wife? IF the patriarchs lived as long as the Bible claims (they didn't), they just confirm the idea that the bad live longer. No, with you there can not be enough repetition. You seem to ignore everything I say the first few dozen times. You don't need to make up excuses. All you need to do is acknowledge that your god is not omnipotent. The tiger trap is an attractive nuisance. It's ILLEGAL by human law. It's EVIL.Your "training dojo" is, again, like turning children loose in a workshop full of power tools. They might learn something useful but they are also likely to learn which tools can cut off your fingers.That kind of "training" is EVIL. The tiger trap has sharpened bamboo punji sticks at the bottom. What does the kid "learn" from being impaled on them? No. YOU remember it.God did tell Adam and Eve that they would DIE if they disobeyed. That is no "training dojo". They certainly would deny parents the right to send their children to certain death. The father of the prodigal son had no choice. His son was going with or without permission. He didn't "send" his son.The Prodigal Son story is what shoots down your idea of exclusivity. It says that the Father favors the rebellious son. It's in parallel with the story of the lost sheep and the story of the lost coin (Luke 15). It's about the Father's attitude. It is not about testing. If somebody falls in, it is certainly the landlord's responsibility. Forget that you ever heard of a "training dojo". Shooting at children with live ammunition is not "training". And you don't see where your "training" analogy breaks down? Show me a school that kills its students. It can command him to stop killing them. No judge worth his salt would allow you to kill your children, even if you call it "training". You've never heard of mistreatment of animals? He said that they WERE like gods. You keep calling Him a liar.They HAD become like gods by disobeying Him. Of course, you don't need to obey your equals. He kicked them out BECAUSE they had become too much like Him. He was afraid. They HAD grown up. They HAD become like gods. Not much you haven't. You've tried to make excuses for killing students. When have I ever done that? And what does it have to do with this discussion? I know you don't. That's why I repeat it, to make it clear to anybody else reading it that you don't pay attention. What do you think that means? And what does it have to do with this discussion? Digging a tiger trap is creating the potential for evil. And it IS evil. Sand dunes on Mars understood that. Why can't you? Does that sound rational tyo you? *Ahem* That is NOT an appeal to popularity. I think it's pretty clear that I know more than YOU.

We know you by what you post and what you post is vile. Maybe it's only your god that's vile but you keep defending him.By now you should have realized how difficult it is to make up a fictional character that's "perfect". There's a reason why fictional characters are almost always flawed, no matter how heroic they are. Even Superman has his kryptonite.Abraham Lincoln (supposedly) said, "No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar." Similarly, no man has a good enough memory to create a consistently perfect fictional character. Note how you're constantly tripping over your own feet when something you say authoritatively is contradicted by something else you said authoritatively.Unfortunately for you, the Internet has a long and fairly accurate memory.