Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Testing The Christian Apologists
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 849 of 1086 (873003)
03-08-2020 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 846 by Phat
03-07-2020 4:43 PM


Re: The point of Christianity
Phat writes:
Just because he has his hand out is no reason to give every single time I see him.
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.
Phat writes:
I give when I feel compelled to give and not out of obligation.
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.)

"I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 846 by Phat, posted 03-07-2020 4:43 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 850 by Phat, posted 03-08-2020 4:48 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 851 of 1086 (873018)
03-08-2020 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 850 by Phat
03-08-2020 4:48 PM


Re: The point of Christianity
Phat writes:
Actually I agree with your Mother. I think I met an angel once...no evidence except that he seemed to glow and he had wisdom that one wouldn't expect out of a homeless man.
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'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 850 by Phat, posted 03-08-2020 4:48 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 852 by Phat, posted 03-09-2020 10:50 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 853 of 1086 (873070)
03-09-2020 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 852 by Phat
03-09-2020 10:50 AM


Re: The point of Christianity
Phat writes:
... its always nice to know that God appreciates our selfless love towards others.
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.
Phat writes:
... I count on being taken care of in the grand scheme of things. I suppose that the homeless feel that way too.
I doubt it. A lot of them have experience with hell-hole churches like the one that you went to.

"I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 852 by Phat, posted 03-09-2020 10:50 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 855 of 1086 (897791)
09-12-2022 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 854 by Phat
09-12-2022 10:45 AM


Re: Is God A Relative?
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
Relativism is the belief that there are no objective, absolute truths. What's true for one person may not be true for another.
I wouldn't use that definition.
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
The relativist's position is self-defeating because the relativist is making an absolute truth claim when they say, "all truth is relative."
I haven't said that all truth is relative.
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
If truth is relative, on what basis can we judge or condemn the actions of people with whom we disagree (For example, Adolph Hitler or Osama Bin Laden)?
On the outcome of their actions.
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
Truth is simply the correspondence of what you know or say to what actually is.
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."
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
Without a society governed by absolute truths, civilization would fall apart.
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.
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
... imagine a world where red stop signs didn't absolutely mean, "stop" for all people.
Apparently, some goober named Peter Kreeft is too young to remember when stop signs were yellow.
Hmmpf. That was easy.
Phat writes:
To say that something is absolutely true means that it is independently true for all people, even if they do not know it or recognize it to be true.
And for absolutists, the "absolute truth" is conveniently what THEY recognize to be true.
Phat writes:
The opposite of absolute truth is relative truth.
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.
Phat writes:
To say that something is relatively true means that it can be true for one person and not for another.
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.
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
The source of evil is not God's power but mankind's freedom.
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 writes:
Even an all-powerful God could not have...
Some goober named Peter Kreeft doesn't understand the meaning of "all-powerful".
some goober named Peter Kreeft writes:
It's a self-contradiction...
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.
Phat writes:
I have elaborated on this argument by saying that God created potential evil and Lucifer chose to actualize it.
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.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 854 by Phat, posted 09-12-2022 10:45 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 857 by Phat, posted 09-12-2022 2:40 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 861 of 1086 (897825)
09-12-2022 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 857 by Phat
09-12-2022 2:40 PM


Re: Power Tools
Phat writes:
For one thing, he brings out your inner contrarian that got you away from the church.
I'm not a contrarian. I only point out the most egregious errors.
Phat writes:
So far you have not insinuated that he is a liar, as you already claimed all apologists were.
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.
Phat writes:
Both you and he respect the book....
I see no evidence that he respects the book.
Phat writes:
Finally, he is not a fraud or a fake as Ravi Zacharias proved to be.
That remains to be seen.
Phat writes:
His academic degrees are legitimate.
Irrelevant.
Phat writes:
So was Lucifer's freedom to rebel.
Lucifer is a figment of your imagination.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
The one who turns a child loose in a workshop full of power tools is evil.
​Depends on what power the tools have.
Utter nonsense.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
Some goober named Peter Kreeft doesn't understand the meaning of "all-powerful".
So kindly explain it to us.
It isn't hard. All-powerful means there is nothing He can not do.
Phat writes:
How could God be truly all-powerful, eliminate all evil potential and actual, and yet still give us free will?
If He was all-powerful, that's EXACTLY what He could do - ANYTHING.
Phat writes:
How free would we be?
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

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 857 by Phat, posted 09-12-2022 2:40 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 865 by Phat, posted 09-13-2022 1:38 PM ringo has replied
 Message 870 by Phat, posted 09-16-2022 3:41 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 869 of 1086 (897853)
09-13-2022 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 865 by Phat
09-13-2022 1:38 PM


Re: Power Tools
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
The "choice" between heaven and hell is no choice at all.
​Only because you want the right to define/create your own special eternal place.
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.
Phat writes:
Or maybe the cold hard logic of your critical thinking leads to the conclusion that this life is all there is.
It's all any of us can know about. Heaven is a false promise and hell is a false threat.
Phat writes:
In which case, all that you really have in the way of eternity is to pass along your kindness and wisdom to your offspring, or perhaps someone else.
What's bad about that?
Phat writes:
How much of a bummer would it be if we could all peer into the future and see the vision of the end of humanity?
We can see it. Collectively, we may become extinct but individually we're going back to the stars.
Phat writes:
Peggy Lee would become a prophet!
I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.
ABE:
I thought you wanted to discuss absolute truth. Get to it.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 865 by Phat, posted 09-13-2022 1:38 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 876 of 1086 (897988)
09-17-2022 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 870 by Phat
09-16-2022 3:41 PM


Re: Moving This Over Here
Phat writes:
So you have no respect for education or degrees from accredited college institutions?
On the contrary, I have great respect for education - but a PhD doesn't make him right.
Phat writes:
Only because you yourself never gained any degrees...
I do have a degree. I don't mention it because it has no bearing on whether I'm right or wrong.
Phat writes:
... and consider yourself and your logic more highly than you ought!
Logic, mine or anybody else's SHOULD be considered highly. We'd all like to see you use some.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
Lucifer is a figment of your imagination.
Some would argue that life itself is a figment of our imagination!
Don't try to be clever. (If they brought that argument here, they would lose.)
Phat writes:
When I attempt to defend Christianity, I argue for a personified good, (Jesus) and a personified evil(Lucifer/Satan).
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.
Phat writes:
This argument concerning figments of imagination is irrelevant.
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.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
The one who turns a child loose in a workshop full of power tools is evil.​
Depends on what power the tools have.
ringo writes:
Utter nonsense.
Humans are not children.
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.
Phat writes:
Humans are not children.
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.
Phat writes:
Children dont need to become forced to believe in God.
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.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
All-powerful means there is nothing He can not do.
Given this logic, God *could* have never allowed Satan to exist.
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.
Phat writes:
Obviously He did...
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.
Phat writes:
... and we should conclude that He has a reason.
Why should we conclude that?
Phat writes:
In context, ringo does not get to define "ANYTHING".
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".
Phat writes:
Let me guess. ringo wants a third option: Leave me alone (to do good on my own terms) don't fry my friends, and quit giving your Christianity a free pass!
Why do you need to guess? I have told you that explicitly many times. If you read my posts, you'd know that.
Phat writes:
Sounds like a rebel in the spirit of a certain fallen angel.
Ain't no fallen angel.
Phat writes:
And lets say that a choice between Heaven and Hell is no choice at all.
Yes, let's say that. In fact, I did say that.
Phat writes:
Ignore the whole story and reject it hook,line, and sinker?
You say that like you haven't heard us telling you that over and over and over again.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 870 by Phat, posted 09-16-2022 3:41 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 883 by Phat, posted 09-17-2022 3:21 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 877 of 1086 (897990)
09-17-2022 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 874 by Phat
09-17-2022 10:42 AM


Re: Moving This Over Here
Phat writes:
Scripture tells us that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.
Nice cherries.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 874 by Phat, posted 09-17-2022 10:42 AM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 878 of 1086 (897991)
09-17-2022 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 875 by Phat
09-17-2022 10:51 AM


Re: Moving This Over Here
Phat writes:
Hell (if it exists) was never created for humans.
That's a bold-faced lie. Jesus said plainly in Matthew 25 that the fake Christians go to everlasting fire.
Phat writes:
Must I go over this again?
Please don't. It's a lie.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 875 by Phat, posted 09-17-2022 10:51 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 881 by Phat, posted 09-17-2022 3:02 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 884 of 1086 (898083)
09-18-2022 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 881 by Phat
09-17-2022 3:02 PM


Re: Moving This Over Here
Phat writes:
Who is the liar between us?
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.
Phat writes:
Who was cursed?
The fake Christians, like you, who say, "Lord! Lord!" instead of DOING what He told them to do.
Phat writes:
Who cursed them? Jesus or themselves?
Jesus cursed them. Nothing in Matthew 25 suggests otherwise. Jesus cursed them.
Phat writes:
I maintain that hell was never meant for humans...
It doesn't matter whom it was "meant" for. The fact is that Jesus sends humans there.
Phat writes:
... but I will add the qualifier: ALL Humans.
That "qualifier" - i.e attempted lie - is irrelevent. SOME humans ARE sent to hell by Jesus. Case closed.
Phat writes:
If in fact, I end up not seeing Jesus in the poor, I will have essentially cursed myself...
No you have not. Jesus has cursed you. Your own quote says that directly: "Depart from me, you cursed."
Phat writes:
... my northern neighbor who accuses me of lying whenever I think!
You never think. I point out your lies when you lie.
Phat writes:
My argument is that God does not curse us.
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.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 881 by Phat, posted 09-17-2022 3:02 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 885 of 1086 (898084)
09-18-2022 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 883 by Phat
09-17-2022 3:21 PM


Re: Moving This Over Here
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
Go ahead and give us an argument for thinking that Jesus is personified good and Satan is personified evil.
You've read the book.
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)
Phat writes:
Why do you call me good? There is none good but God.
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.
Phat writes:
Thus...sheep follow the shepherd, who represents personified good.
But Jesus DOESN"T represent personified good. If He is God and God creates evil, then He represents good AND evil.
Phat writes:
goats follow nobody yet end up with the devil and his angels.
Goats - like you - PRETEND to follow Jesus - and Jesus sends them to everlasting fire.
Phat writes:
Since you don't believe satan exists, you label God as the monster.
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.
Phat writes:
Perhaps that is one reason you threw the
whole story away hook, line, and sinker.
Wrong, as usual. I threw away each hook, line and sinker - of your theology, not of the Bible - individually, because they're individually nonsense.
Phat writes:
You can throw them ALL away, including the One. But in your head, you gotta serve somebody!
Maybe I serve Bob Dylan.
Phat writes:
Also I might again mention the book of revelation.
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.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 883 by Phat, posted 09-17-2022 3:21 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 886 by Phat, posted 09-18-2022 4:47 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 887 of 1086 (898127)
09-19-2022 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 886 by Phat
09-18-2022 4:47 PM


Re: Gishing It Out With Ringo
Phat writes:
Dont Gish me, either.
I didn't Gish you. I gave a direct response. That's the opposite of Gish.
Phat writes:
You claim God Himself said it, but when anything in the book supports your argument you focus on it.
The "but" in that sentence shouldn't be there.
Phat writes:
When I bring up the Book of Revelation and have a perfectly good counter-argument, you accuse me of Gishing it were true.
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.
Phat writes:
I have said many many many times that God logically created the possibility of evil.
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.
Phat writes:
If you disagree, explain to me how evil could manifest without an action by a human.
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.
Phat writes:
Am I not allowed to elaborate or speculate on what a book written by humans means?
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.
Phat writes:
Jesus said there is none good but God. Was He lying?
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".
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
But Jesus DOESN"T represent personified good. If He is God and God creates evil, then He represents good AND evil.
That's not what the book says. That's what ringo concludes.
What else can you conclude? Give an argument, for once.
Phat writes:
Jesus and I have a give-and-take relationship. He commands. I question.
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.
Phat writes:
If He ultimately sends me to hell, you will have won the argument.
Then I can't win the argument because He doesn't exist so He can't send you to hell.
Phat writes:
Note that the sheep and goats story has not yet happened. At this point, we don't know who the sheep are and who the goats are.
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).
Phat writes:
At this point, we don't know who the sheep are and who the goats are.
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".
Phat writes:
If God were both good and evil, as your lame interpretation of His character suggests...
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.
Phat writes:
He would have plainly said "I AM good and evil...."
He did.
He who creates evil is evil.
Phat writes:
In which case, humans are all let off the hook for being responsible for what they do, since it is all up to God anyway.
That makes no sense. Try again in English.
Phat writes:
You defend a book full of characters you doubt even exist.
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.
Phat writes:
And don't go trotting out your argument that Long John Silver or Bilbo Baggins don't exist and yet are themselves in books.
I WILL trot out the argument until you understand that it is true.
Phat writes:
It too is a lame argument.
SHOW that it is lame.
Phat writes:
You can't judge someone by a book that you think was written by humans.
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.
phat writes:
ringo writes:
What has that got to do with what we're talking about?
This started out with you saying, and I quote:
ringo writes:
Go ahead and give us an argument for thinking that Jesus is personified good and Satan is personified evil.
It is you who are Gishing.
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).
Phat writes:
You have become like jar...
Thanks for the compliment. I have also become like God (Genesis 3:22).
Phat writes:
... trying to argue by reframing an argument to favor your points.
Well, forgive me for presenting my side of the argument. I'd argue your side but it doesn't make any sense.
Phat writes:
In fact, I think you have one scripture for the OT, Isaiah 45:7, and one scripture for the NT, Matthew 25.
I mentioned Genesis 3 just above. I mention it quite often but you never address it.
Phat writes:
And I expect you to address the scriptures I quoted from Revelation...
You can expect till the cows come home. I'll address it when/if you tie it into what we're discussing.
Phat writes:
... and kindly explain why I'm wrong about a Beast who does not yet exist and a Jesus who eternally does.
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.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 886 by Phat, posted 09-18-2022 4:47 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 889 of 1086 (898860)
10-01-2022 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 888 by Phat
10-01-2022 8:24 AM


Re: Finding Honesty In Apologetics
Phat writes:
Everyone dies a bit when they practice evil.
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
Phat writes:
I'm surprised that Trump is not yet dead.
Which falsifies your bumper sticker.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
All assumptions should be questioned.
And anyone brought before any judge should have been questioned already before being sentenced to death!
What does that have to do with what you quoted?
Phat writes:
Perhaps the snake/serpent was a necessary competition to prevent God from having a monopoly.
You're saying again that your god is not omnipotent - i.e. he doesn't have a monopoly on power.
Phat writes:
God may well have "created both good and evil, but it was actually for our own good.
Yeah, the neighbor kids fall into the tiger trap "for their own good."
Phat writes:
Note the distinction between
creating good and evil and/or life and death vs actually
BEING* good and evil.
We have noted many, many, many, many, many, many, many times that they are exactly the same.
Phat writes:
I disagree with the assessment that God is complete rather than good.
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.
Phat writes:
I also agree with the assessment that the serpent told a partial truth rather than the truth, the whole truth, and nothing BUT the truth.
What was partial about it? He said they wouldn't die the same day and they didn't.
Phat writes:
Kreeft suggests that God is misunderstood.
You're bound to misunderstand Him if you deny His exact words.
Phat writes:
Kreeft agrees that it is illogical.
Does he also agree that water is wet?
Phat writes:
As I and Kreeft have argued before, God merely created the possibility of evil.
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.
Phat writes:
Are Kreeft and I being dishonest by speculating that God created the possibility of evil?
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!

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 888 by Phat, posted 10-01-2022 8:24 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 890 by Phat, posted 10-02-2022 1:44 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 891 of 1086 (898894)
10-02-2022 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 890 by Phat
10-02-2022 1:44 PM


Re: Finding Honesty In Apologetics
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
Only the good die young -- Billy Joel
​Not according to the Bible. Many of the Patriarchs lived many many many many years.
But of course that isn't true.
Phat writes:
The Patriarchs were as human as you or I, but they are remembered due to the good they spread through leadership.
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.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
All assumptions should be questioned.
Yes. (Note that only one yes is needed!)
No, with you there can not be enough repetition. You seem to ignore everything I say the first few dozen times.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
You're saying again that your god is not omnipotent - i.e. he doesn't have a monopoly on power.
He chose to give up the monopoly....
You don't need to make up excuses. All you need to do is acknowledge that your god is not omnipotent.
Phat writes:
The Tiger Trap is merely a training dojo.
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.
Phat writes:
The kid falls into the trap much as a Kung Fu student is tested (tempted) by cunning masters intent on making him stronger and wiser.
The tiger trap has sharpened bamboo punji sticks at the bottom. What does the kid "learn" from being impaled on them?
Phat writes:
Forget the terminology of "Tiger Trap."
No. YOU remember it.
God did tell Adam and Eve that they would DIE if they disobeyed. That is no "training dojo".
Phat writes:
And no court would deny parents the right to send their children out into the world.
They certainly would deny parents the right to send their children to certain death.
Phat writes:
It is the process that the Father used for his prodigal son.
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.
Phat writes:
If a landlord digs a pit in the back yard, the pit is in effect the trap...lure....dojo of the tempter and is not the landlord's responsibility.
If somebody falls in, it is certainly the landlord's responsibility.
Phat writes:
It is merely a training dojo on the path of life.
Forget that you ever heard of a "training dojo". Shooting at children with live ammunition is not "training".
Phat writes:
Some students make it out alive, while others experience death.
And you don't see where your "training" analogy breaks down? Show me a school that kills its students.
Phat writes:
No court can command the teacher to quit testing the students.
It can command him to stop killing them.
Phat writes:
Any judge worth their salt would allow a training dojo in the backyard.
No judge worth his salt would allow you to kill your children, even if you call it "training".
Phat writes:
Call it a tiger trap if you wish. And if it did trap a tiger, only a tiger could sue, and Tigers cant read.
You've never heard of mistreatment of animals?
Phat writes:
He also told them they would be like gods and they ended up homeless and naked.
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.
Phat writes:
The landlord kicked them out.
He kicked them out BECAUSE they had become too much like Him. He was afraid.
Phat writes:
Perhaps they were expected to grow up.
They HAD grown up. They HAD become like gods.
Phat writes:
Now I have challenged the accusation that it was a trap.
Not much you haven't. You've tried to make excuses for killing students.
Phat writes:
You love to invoke appeals to popularity--
When have I ever done that? And what does it have to do with this discussion?
Phat writes:
I dont care how many times you repeat the word "yes" or "many".
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.
Phat writes:
Many are called yet few are chosen.
What do you think that means? And what does it have to do with this discussion?
Phat writes:
I would object and say that it was *you* who mentioned tiger traps.
Digging a tiger trap is creating the potential for evil. And it IS evil. Sand dunes on Mars understood that. Why can't you?
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
Stop blaming the victims.
Stop defending them in court. Allow the victims to speak.
Does that sound rational tyo you?
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
See the dozens of times it has been explained to you! The one who creates the problem is responsible!
You are simply trying to frame the argument, invoking an appeal to popularity...
*Ahem* That is NOT an appeal to popularity.
Phat writes:
... and thinking you know more than God err I mean Christians.
I think it's pretty clear that I know more than YOU.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 890 by Phat, posted 10-02-2022 1:44 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 895 of 1086 (898911)
10-03-2022 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 893 by Phat
10-02-2022 3:49 PM


Re: Finding Honesty In Apologetics
Phat writes:
But to label someone as a vile human being without knowing anything about them is unwarranted.
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.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 893 by Phat, posted 10-02-2022 3:49 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024