Testing The Christian Apologists

Dont Gish me, either. You claim God Himself said it, but when anything in the book supports your argument you focus on it. When I bring up the Book of Revelation and have a perfectly good counter-argument, you accuse me of Gishing it were true. I have said many many many times that God logically created the possibility of evil. If you disagree, explain to me how evil could manifest without an action by a human. The book says He said it. Am I not allowed to elaborate or speculate on what a book written by humans means? Jesus said there is none good but God. Was He lying? That's not what the book says. That's what ringo concludes. Jesus and I have a give-and-take relationship. He commands. I question. If He ultimately sends me to hell, you will have won the argument. 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. If God were both good and evil, as your lame interpretation of His character suggests, He would have plainly said "I AM good and evil. I AM complete." 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.
​ Well, I can't do the same to you. You defend a book full of characters you doubt even exist. And don't go trotting out your argument that Long John Silver or Bilbo Baggins don't exist and yet are themselves in books. It too is a lame argument. You can't judge someone by a book that you think was written by humans.
​ Well he is Jewish, so one messiah is as good as another. This started out with you saying, and I quote:

quote:

---

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. You have become like jar--trying to argue by reframing an argument to favor your points. In fact, I think you have one scripture for the OT, Isaiah 45:7, and one scripture for the NT, Matthew 25. And I expect you to address the scriptures I quoted from Revelation and kindly explain why I'm wrong about a Beast who does not yet exist and a Jesus who eternally does.

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.

Everyone dies a bit when they practice evil. I'm surprised that Trump is not yet dead. And anyone brought before any judge should have been questioned already before being sentenced to death!If God exists, humanity is being questioned to this day regarding their collective fate. We become the decisions we make, both individually, nationally, and globally. Perhaps the snake/serpent was a necessary competition to prevent God from having a monopoly. God may well have "created both good and evil, but it was actually for our own good. Note the distinction between
creating good and evil and/or life and death vs actually
BEING* good and evil.I disagree with the assessment that God is complete rather than good. 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.Metaphorically, Kreeft suggests that God is misunderstood. Many Christians assume that

God exists

God is all-good.

God is all-powerful.

God is all-wise.

Evil exists.

​

How can all of those statements be true at the same time?
Kreeft agrees that it is illogical.

The Case For Faith writes:

​

(Peter Kreeft talking "I remember a liberal preacher who once tried to dissuade me from taking up with the fundamentalists. He said: There's a logical problem here--you can be intelligent, or you can be honest, or you can be a fundamentalist, or any two of the three, but not all three!"

​

Kreeft says that the same dilemma exists in the five points mentioned above.

Kreeft writes:

​

It seems you have to drop one of those beliefs. If God is all-powerful, He can do anything. If God is all-good, He wants only good. If God is all-wise, He knows what is good. Thus, if all those beliefs are true--and most Christians believe they are--then the consequence is that no evil can exist. But evil does exist.

As I and Kreeft have argued before, God merely created the possibility of evil. So who actualizes it? (perhaps Republicans )

​

Are Kreeft and I being dishonest by speculating that God created the possibility of evil?

Edited by Phat, : correcting punctuation errors

---

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.”
H. Richard Niebuhr, The Kingdom of God in America

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).

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!

quote:

---

Only the good die young -- Billy Joel

---

Not according to the Bible. Many of the Patriarchs lived many many many many years. Billy Joel needs his piano tuned up! The Patriarchs were as human as you or I, but they are remembered due to the good they spread through leadership.​ Yes. (Note that only one yes is needed! )
​ He chose to give up the monopoly, allowing the tempter(tester) to temper us and make us stronger. The Tiger Trap is merely a training dojo. Kinda, in a way. 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. Forget the terminology of "Tiger Trap." Think Training Dojo.And no court would deny parents the right to send their children out into the world..ie the school of hard knocks. It is the process that the Father used for his prodigal son.
​ 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. It is merely a training dojo on the path of life. Some students make it out alive, while others experience death. No court can command the teacher to quit testing the students. Any judge worth their salt would allow a training dojo in the backyard. Call it a tiger trap if you wish. And if it did trap a tiger, only a tiger could sue, and Tigers cant read. Would you help satan win his case or are you going to allow the metaphor to change from Tiger Trap to training Dojo?
​ He also told them they would be like gods and they ended up homeless and naked. The landlord kicked them out. Perhaps they were expected to grow up. Now I have challenged the accusation that it was a trap. It was training.
​You love to invoke appeals to popularity--

quote:

---

YES! Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes! You are being dishonest! See the dozens of times it has been explained to you!

---

I dont care how many times you repeat the word "yes" or "many". Many are called yet few are chosen. [/quote] I would object and say that it was *you* who mentioned tiger traps. Perhaps it is you who is the attractive nuisance. Comb your har and straighten up. Jesus is coming back soon. Look busy! Stop defending them in court. Allow the victims to speak. You are simply trying to frame the argument, invoking an appeal to popularity and thinking you know more than God err I mean Christians.

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.

You are a vile human being. You are willing to countenance any evil in order to support your belief in a god.

Will you stop? You and I never even talk or have a discussion about anything here at EvC. All I get from you is armchair criticism. Whether you care about the names on the screen apart from whether or not they agree with your politics I do not know. But to label someone as a vile human being without knowing anything about them is unwarranted. I suppose i could tell you to go crawl back under your rock, but I have more respect for you than that. I mean really, Theo.

You are saying the horrendous death of children is part of your god's plan. To think that and approve of that is inhuman, inhumane, and vile. I am glad you take offense.

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.

And ​
So one day, a woman you obviously knew well has a son. The boy grows up. One day he robs a bank and shoots a guard. Are you responsible for his evil?More to your point, if God created a fully free-willed Lucifer who chose to rebel and become Satan, why in Heaven is God responsible? If I were capable of creating a free-willed Being who made a wrong choice, why am I responsible?

If you build a fucking bomb and blow up a bunch of people, who the fuck is responsible?

You don't miss points, you consciously ignore them.
Classic troll.

If I created a dog that could just choose to viciously bite any child that walks by, would I be responsible for any children who are harmed after I let the dog loose in the neighborhood?

The woman did not "create" the evil. More than totally unrelated? He didn't. Lucifer is a figment of your imagination. You might as well try to use Darth Vader to back up your "point". There's a difference between a HUMAN woman bearing a HUMAN son and an omnipotent God CREATING evil. Why in Heaven can you not understand that? The woman had no control over the son. God DOES (supposedly) have control. Duh! If you HAVE the power to stop evil and you CHOOSE not to stop evil, that IS responsibility. That's what responsibility MEANS.Why do you keep wasting our time with this nonsense when it has been explained to you umpteen times?