Originally posted by Jacky Woo:you will never understand xtian beliefs, however how incoherent and illogical they are.
to me it doesnt make any sense. karl marx is spot on to say, religion is an opiate is very true.opium is addictive and harmful, but people still enjoy and addicted to it in the older days.
Which part of atheism makes sense? The part that the universe made itself from nothing?
Originally posted by BroInChrist:Didn't you learn in Sunday School that Christ lives in every believer? God is with us. So you see, once again I have exposed you for the fraud that you are.
LOL.
You are theologically unsound.
Every christian and pastor will tell you that being in heaven with god (perfection) is way better than being on earth with jesus' presence.
Are you really a christian?
No one is binding you to Dawkins. But logic demands that an atheist believes in certain things, which are basically those that Dawkins wrote about. At least he is upfront about what atheism entails and implies.
Things which you impute atheism to involve. Dawkins said life is not created towards a purpose. You twisted "purpose" to mean, I quote: "Why do you bother to get up in the morning and do anything at all?"
Originally posted by BroInChrist:Which part of atheism makes sense? The part that the universe made itself from nothing?
Sounds familiar.
Like how god always existed and made himself from nothing and 3 of them talk to each other?
Originally posted by Tcmc:BIC
I didnt even bring in atheism because its irrelevant. Atheism isnt a religion, as much as your deluded mind wants it to be.
I am just comparing the different religions for you to see, to show you that your excluse claim in christianity doesnt necessary make it "better" or superior".
Religion A says god A is good. Religion B says god B is good.
Atheism doesnt come into the picture because it doesnt claim that any god is good.
It's like comparing football and basketball and then you bring in "not playing football" as a sport to compare...
You don't want to bring in atheism because you don't wish to defend atheism. It's a cop out act of intellectual cowardice. It is a religion and I have already shown why it is so, as much as you wish to deny it in the face of evidence.
Atheism comes into the picture because it says all religions are false. It's like coming into the sports arena and saying that none of the sports are sports at all because there's no such thing as sports.
Originally posted by Tcmc:Sounds familiar.
Like how god always existed and made himself from nothing and 3 of them talk to each other?
You exposed your own fraud again.
Which part of the Bible says that God made Himself from nothing?
Originally posted by Tcmc:LOL.
You are theologically unsound.
Every christian and pastor will tell you that being in heaven with god (perfection) is way better than being on earth with jesus' presence.
Are you really a christian?
So just because heaven is far better means I should seek death now? How? Mass suicide? Oh you would diewishing for that ya?
Whatever happened to living for Christ?
Originally posted by BroInChrist:You don't want to bring in atheism because you don't wish to defend atheism. It's a cop out act of intellectual cowardice. It is a religion and I have already shown why it is so, as much as you wish to deny it in the face of evidence.
Atheism comes into the picture because it says all religions are false. It's like coming into the sports arena and saying that none of the sports are sports at all because there's no such thing as sports.
No you are wrong. Comparing atheism with religions is like comparing football, basketball and not playing sports and saying all are actually "similar".
LOL.
Originally posted by BroInChrist:You exposed your own fraud again.
Which part of the Bible says that God made Himself from nothing?
BIC,
LOL, play of words. Is that your only forte?
Ok then, where did the christian god come from? LOL.
"Has always been"?
DOes that sound like "Came from nothing"?
Originally posted by alize:No one is binding you to Dawkins. But logic demands that an atheist believes in certain things, which are basically those that Dawkins wrote about. At least he is upfront about what atheism entails and implies.
Things which you impute atheism to involve. Dawkins said life is not created towards a purpose. You twisted "purpose" to mean, I quote: "Why do you bother to get up in the morning and do anything at all?"
What twisting? Dawkins rejected creation. For him life has no purpose but only pitiless indifference. Having said that, what's wrong with me asking why he bothered to get up in the morning? What difference does it make? Who cares?
Originally posted by Tcmc:BIC,
LOL, play of words. Is that your only forte?
Ok then, where did the christian god come from? LOL.
"Has always been"?
DOes that sound like "Came from nothing"?
It's not me playing word games. It's you being theologically incompetent, and failed in English too.
Always existed means always existed. It means there was never a time when God was not there. Asking where God come from is like asking who's the bachelor's wife. It is a meaningless question.
Originally posted by BroInChrist:So just because heaven is far better means I should seek death now? How? Mass suicide? Oh you would diewishing for that ya?
Whatever happened to living for Christ?
BIC,
Thanks for admitting your previous theological error when you implied that being in heaven is the same as being on earth with jesus.
Well, going by your religion, yes, every christian SHOULD seek death, because the bible says to seek god earnestly and yearn to be with him. The whole of christianity is about being with god and to become more like him in perfection.
So isnt seeking death the best way ?
If you try to give ANY reason to not die and be with god, arent you trying to delay being with god??
Why would you wanna delay being with god in his FULL PRESENCE?
Originally posted by Tcmc:No you are wrong. Comparing atheism with religions is like comparing football, basketball and not playing sports and saying all are actually "similar".
LOL.
That's provided atheism is not a religion. But as I have shown earlier. It is. It meets every criterion for what a religion is, and the courts have also ruled that it is. It is time you face up to reality. You need a refresher here http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion
Originally posted by Tcmc:BIC,
Thanks for admitting your previous theological error when you implied that being in heaven is the same as being on earth with jesus.
Well, going by your religion, yes, every christian SHOULD seek death, because the bible says to seek god earnestly and yearn to be with him. The whole of christianity is about being with god and to become more like him in perfection.
So isnt seeking death the best way ?
If you try to give ANY reason to not die and be with god, arent you trying to delay being with god??
Why would you wanna delay being with god in his FULL PRESENCE?
Your theological error is assuming that Christ is not with us when we are still alive.
Well, going by the Bible, does it teach that Christians should seek death? Because if you can find chapter and verse teaching that, you win!
Originally posted by BroInChrist:Your theological error is assuming that Christ is not with us when we are still alive.
Well, going by the Bible, does it teach that Christians should seek death? Because if you can find chapter and verse teaching that, you win!
TA-DA!
Thanks for highlighting a contradiction! Ok dying and being with god is the best in heaven, yet christians should not seek death.
TO me, thats a stark contradiction!
Originally posted by BroInChrist:That's provided atheism is not a religion. But as I have shown earlier. It is. It meets every criterion for what a religion is, and the courts have also ruled that it is. It is time you face up to reality. You need a refresher here http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion
| Noun: |
|
Originally posted by BroInChrist:I don't need you to tell me that the Bible is not a science textbook. Creationists by and large already know that. See http://creation.com/but-the-bibles-not-a-science-textbook-is-it
Of course I can accept facts. But since when does "chewing the cud" can only mean the narrow sense as in modern day scientific understanding? It's like you telling me that if the word "gay" appears in the Bible it must refer to homosexuals because that's what it's meant today. That would be absurd. Like I said, Scripture writers employ the language of appearance. Even Linneaus classified the rabbit as one that "chews the cud" based on OBSERVATION of physical characteristics and behaviour.
"I don't need you to tell me that the Bible is not a science textbook. Creationists by and large already know that."
But you just told me that the bible is not a science textbook before I clarify that I posted such before in this particular thread... Double standard much? You can tell me and I don't need say the same to you even if I had the 1st say?
Creationist you say... fasle attribution...
"Of course I can accept facts. But since when does "chewing the cud" can only mean the narrow sense as in modern day scientific understanding? It's like you telling me that if the word "gay" appears in the Bible it must refer to homosexuals because that's what it's meant today. That would be absurd. Like I said, Scripture writers employ the language of appearance. Even Linneaus classified the rabbit as one that "chews the cud" based on OBSERVATION of physical characteristics and behaviour."
Let me help you by repeating my simple question:
Can you accept that the badger/ coney is neither a ruminant nor practises refection? Lev 11:5
P.S: Can you see the strawman in red... that your good self have set? Strawmaning is a right in the interwedz...
Count of illogical fallacy in your post: 2
Originally posted by Tcmc:TA-DA!
Thanks for highlighting a contradiction! Ok dying and being with god is the best in heaven, yet christians should not seek death.
TO me, thats a stark contradiction!
Dude, you do not even know what is a contradiction!
Originally posted by BroInChrist:Wrong. At end of Day 6 God said it was all "VERY GOOD". There was no death before sin.
So are you saying the other lifeforms suffer death because of Adam's sin...
Originally posted by BroInChrist:That's provided atheism is not a religion. But as I have shown earlier. It is. It meets every criterion for what a religion is, and the courts have also ruled that it is. It is time you face up to reality. You need a refresher here http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion
Tell me what courts have declared atheism a religion. They affirmed the right to atheism to give atheists protection from people like you.
What twisting? Dawkins rejected creation. For him life has no purpose but only pitiless indifference. Having said that, what's wrong with me asking why he bothered to get up in the morning? What difference does it make? Who cares?
Of course he rejected creation. Why are you bringing this up?
Having God intend a meaning for your life is different from finding a meaning that drives you to get up in the morning.
to say God was made from nothing still implies God was created...but just as infinity cannot be valued, eternity cannot be timed, God cannot be made...but the universe is not eternal and humans are still uncertain if the universe is infinite...the natural laws that govern the universe are neither infinite nor eternal so its not wrong to say such laws and the universe need to be made...
my pt is the words ''made'' and ''created'' suggest limitations, finity, and boundaries. every matter even according to evolution will decay, rust, rot etc...every matter is limited within the realm of time and limitation...so to ask who created matter is valid but to ask who created God is not simply cos its tantamount to asking whats the value of infinity, or who limited eternity? this is the last time i am responding on this issue...Over to u, BIC!!! :)
Originally posted by Tcmc:re·li·gion/riˈlijÉ™n/
Noun:
- The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
- Details of belief as taught or discussed.
Then Buddhism should not be called a religion, but it is.
Then secular humanism should not be called a religion, but it is. See http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/definitions/humanism_religion.htm
So the problem has to do with the definition of religion. It should not be defined narrowly anymore. A better way to determine whether a worldview is a religion is to look for certain characteristics that religions have in common. The framework set forth by Ninian Smart, commonly known as the Seven Dimensions of Religion, is widely accepted by anthropologists and researchers of religion as broadly covering the various aspects of religion, without focusing on things unique to specific religions.
The seven dimensions proposed by Smart are narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and material. Not every religion has every dimension, nor are they all equally important within an individual religion. Smart even argues that the “secularisation” of western society is actually a shift of focus from the doctrinal and ritual to the experiential.
See the rest here http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion
Originally posted by alize:Tell me what courts have declared atheism a religion. They affirmed the right to atheism to give atheists protection from people like you.
BIC,
religion by proper definition is a belief in deities or gods.
Atheism lacks the essence of what religion is.....
Your pastors teach you lies to spread hate.
Originally posted by BroInChrist:Then Buddhism should not be called a religion, but it is.
Then secular humanism should not be called a religion, but it is. See http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/definitions/humanism_religion.htm
So the problem has to do with the definition of religion. It should not be defined narrowly anymore. A better way to determine whether a worldview is a religion is to look for certain characteristics that religions have in common. The framework set forth by Ninian Smart, commonly known as the Seven Dimensions of Religion, is widely accepted by anthropologists and researchers of religion as broadly covering the various aspects of religion, without focusing on things unique to specific religions.
The seven dimensions proposed by Smart are narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and material. Not every religion has every dimension, nor are they all equally important within an individual religion. Smart even argues that the “secularisation” of western society is actually a shift of focus from the doctrinal and ritual to the experiential.
See the rest here http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion
BIC,
You are displaying your serious lack of knowledge of other religions, AS USUAL.
Buddhism incorporates MANY supernatural elements, spirits and deities, depending on its sect or denomination.
So fairly speaking, Buddhism IS a religion in practice.