Discussion:
Do Christians accept the Old Testament as the word of God?
(too old to reply)
Simpson
2007-12-21 00:44:52 UTC
Permalink
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?

Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?

Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
2007-12-21 00:53:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Probably. After all, biblethumpers will believe anything.
What Me Worry?
2007-12-21 02:25:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Christians pick and choose what they want to believe, as it suits them.

Even the "fundamentalists," who claim the Bible is a literal history,
selectively ignore the parts they don't want to believe.

Not that it matters what a bunch of violent, bigoted wackos think about a
work of fiction.
Henry Von Sweitzenheimer
2007-12-21 17:30:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Christians pick and choose what they want to believe, as it suits them.
Even the "fundamentalists," who claim the Bible is a literal history,
selectively ignore the parts they don't want to believe.
Not that it matters what a bunch of violent, bigoted wackos think about a
work of fiction.
SOUNDS LIKE THE KRAPAN, DOESN'T IT?
Feng
2007-12-21 03:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.

Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
What Me Worry?
2007-12-21 04:01:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
Feng
2007-12-21 04:30:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.

According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.

Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
What Me Worry?
2007-12-21 04:42:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true, then Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
Feng
2007-12-21 05:15:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true, then Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.

I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.

Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?

I think so.
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
Denis Loubet
2007-12-21 06:03:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true, then Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we started. How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which you use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your nature is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we listen to
anything you have to say?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
--
Denis Loubet
***@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
Feng
2007-12-21 07:21:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true, then Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we started. How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which you use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your nature is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we listen to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible. The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
Denis Loubet
2007-12-21 08:51:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true, then Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we started. How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which you use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?

How can you tell, since I presume you would use it to determine whether it's
corrupted or not. If the love in your heart is corrupted, it might very well
tell you that it's not. Then where would you be?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your nature is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
But that's according to your common sense, which you admit is corruptable.
Why would you believe it?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we listen to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible.
Since your "innate knowledge of truth" is part of your human nature, which
you admit is corruptable, then clearly it can be corrupted just like the
rest of your human nature.
Post by Feng
The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
But the search is carried out by a corruptable nature, which I assume would
result in falsehoods being mistaken for truth. And how did you determine
that your inner soul is accurate? Is there some objective test that can be
performed?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
But you've learned it all through a corruptable human nature. You've just
arbitrarily decided that it's true.
--
Denis Loubet
***@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
Feng
2007-12-21 15:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true, then Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we started. How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which you use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Post by Denis Loubet
How can you tell, since I presume you would use it to determine whether it's
corrupted or not. If the love in your heart is corrupted, it might very well
tell you that it's not. Then where would you be?
I know the love in my heart is the Rock I can bet my life on, because
it is also the love in everyone's heart.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your nature is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
But that's according to your common sense, which you admit is corruptable.
Why would you believe it?
No, the teaching of Christ has nothing to do with my common sense. If
you follow the teaching of Christ, you will know his Love. Through his
Love, you will find the truth.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we listen to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible.
Since your "innate knowledge of truth" is part of your human nature, which
you admit is corruptable, then clearly it can be corrupted just like the
rest of your human nature.
Not really. The knowledge of truth can be hidden and forgotten, but it
can never be corrupted to be something else even in the most evil
person on earth. It will always remain true.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
But the search is carried out by a corruptable nature, which I assume would
result in falsehoods being mistaken for truth. And how did you determine
that your inner soul is accurate? Is there some objective test that can be
performed?
Yes. The objective test is the truth itself. The searcher does not
determine the truth. The truth will open up the searcher's eyes
instead. That is the reason why it is often called the enlightenment
instead of the discovery.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
But you've learned it all through a corruptable human nature.
Not without the help from the divine.

You've just
Post by Denis Loubet
arbitrarily decided that it's true.
That is never a decision for me to make. I can only manage to
recognize the truth when truth reveals itself. The truth is always
self-evident. I have no choice but to obey the truth.
Simpson
2007-12-21 17:09:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true, then Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we started. How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which you use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?

Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
How can you tell, since I presume you would use it to determine whether it's
corrupted or not. If the love in your heart is corrupted, it might very well
tell you that it's not. Then where would you be?
I know the love in my heart is the Rock I can bet my life on, because
it is also the love in everyone's heart.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your nature is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
But that's according to your common sense, which you admit is corruptable.
Why would you believe it?
No, the teaching of Christ has nothing to do with my common sense. If
you follow the teaching of Christ, you will know his Love. Through his
Love, you will find the truth.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we listen to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible.
Since your "innate knowledge of truth" is part of your human nature, which
you admit is corruptable, then clearly it can be corrupted just like the
rest of your human nature.
Not really. The knowledge of truth can be hidden and forgotten, but it
can never be corrupted to be something else even in the most evil
person on earth. It will always remain true.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
But the search is carried out by a corruptable nature, which I assume would
result in falsehoods being mistaken for truth. And how did you determine
that your inner soul is accurate? Is there some objective test that can be
performed?
Yes. The objective test is the truth itself. The searcher does not
determine the truth. The truth will open up the searcher's eyes
instead. That is the reason why it is often called the enlightenment
instead of the discovery.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
But you've learned it all through a corruptable human nature.
Not without the help from the divine.
You've just
Post by Denis Loubet
arbitrarily decided that it's true.
That is never a decision for me to make. I can only manage to
recognize the truth when truth reveals itself. The truth is always
self-evident. I have no choice but to obey the truth.
Feng
2007-12-21 17:19:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?
Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Not likely. Everything that I know is corruptible. The thing that I
have no choice but to rely on is not corruptible.
Christopher A.Lee
2007-12-21 18:09:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?
Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Not likely. Everything that I know is corruptible. The thing that I
have no choice but to rely on is not corruptible.
Idiot.
Simpson
2007-12-22 04:35:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?
Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Not likely. Everything that I know is corruptible. The thing that I
have no choice but to rely on is not corruptible.
How do you know that?
Feng
2007-12-22 05:05:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?
Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Not likely. Everything that I know is corruptible. The thing that I
have no choice but to rely on is not corruptible.
How do you know that?
Personal experience.
Simpson
2007-12-23 01:47:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?
Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Not likely. Everything that I know is corruptible. The thing that I
have no choice but to rely on is not corruptible.
How do you know that?
Personal experience.
But you're corruptible and your experience is not infallible.

Better to say "I believe" or "I have faith in" rather than "I know".

Saying "I know" smacks of arrogance, not conviction.
Feng
2007-12-23 02:42:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?
Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Not likely. Everything that I know is corruptible. The thing that I
have no choice but to rely on is not corruptible.
How do you know that?
Personal experience.
But you're corruptible and your experience is not infallible.
I don't know what it means. How can my experience be fallible? You are
not suggesting I dreamed about living my life, are you?
Post by Simpson
Better to say "I believe" or "I have faith in" rather than "I know".
Saying "I know" smacks of arrogance, not conviction.
Sorry, I can not deny what I have already learned.
Simpson
2007-12-23 04:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
Is the part of you that "knows" corruptible? Are their two parts to your
nature, the corruptible and the incorruptible?
Doesn't that smack of schizophrenia?
Not likely. Everything that I know is corruptible. The thing that I
have no choice but to rely on is not corruptible.
How do you know that?
Personal experience.
But you're corruptible and your experience is not infallible.
I don't know what it means. How can my experience be fallible? You are
not suggesting I dreamed about living my life, are you?
Post by Simpson
Better to say "I believe" or "I have faith in" rather than "I know".
Saying "I know" smacks of arrogance, not conviction.
Sorry, I can not deny what I have already learned.
Well then... you're an arrogant fool.
Denis Loubet
2007-12-22 09:16:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as
the
New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true,
then
Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we started. How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which you use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
How do you know? You can't use the love in your heart to determine if the
love in your heart is not corruptable, because if it was corrupted, it would
tell you it wasn't.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
How can you tell, since I presume you would use it to determine whether it's
corrupted or not. If the love in your heart is corrupted, it might very well
tell you that it's not. Then where would you be?
I know the love in my heart is the Rock I can bet my life on, because
it is also the love in everyone's heart.
How do you know that? Did the love in your heart tell you that? If it's
corrupted, wouldn't you expect it to tell you that?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your
nature
is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
But that's according to your common sense, which you admit is corruptable.
Why would you believe it?
No, the teaching of Christ has nothing to do with my common sense.
You can say that again.
Post by Feng
If
you follow the teaching of Christ, you will know his Love. Through his
Love, you will find the truth.
How do you know? If Christ were evil, then that's what you'd expect Christ
to say.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we listen to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible.
Since your "innate knowledge of truth" is part of your human nature, which
you admit is corruptable, then clearly it can be corrupted just like the
rest of your human nature.
Not really. The knowledge of truth can be hidden and forgotten, but it
can never be corrupted to be something else even in the most evil
person on earth. It will always remain true.
How do you know? If you're using corrupted knowledge of truth to determine
that your knowledge of truth is not corrupted, you're hosed. Circular tests
like that mean exactly nothing.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
But the search is carried out by a corruptable nature, which I assume would
result in falsehoods being mistaken for truth. And how did you determine
that your inner soul is accurate? Is there some objective test that can be
performed?
Yes. The objective test is the truth itself.
How do you know? How do you determine you know the truth so you can tell if
you know the truth or not?

Do you know what objective means?
Post by Feng
The searcher does not
determine the truth.
Granted. So why are you assuming you know the truth?
Post by Feng
The truth will open up the searcher's eyes
instead.
How does the searcher know that what he's experiencing as eye-opening is the
truth?
Post by Feng
That is the reason why it is often called the enlightenment
instead of the discovery.
Many people who have believed themselves to be enlightened have been wrong.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
But you've learned it all through a corruptable human nature.
Not without the help from the divine.
How do you know the help you receive is from the divine? Wouldn't an evil
entity pretend to be divine to fool you into doing evil?
Post by Feng
You've just
Post by Denis Loubet
arbitrarily decided that it's true.
That is never a decision for me to make.
Nonsense. You have made many bland assertions concerning the accuracy and
incorruptability of the love in your heart, your knowledge of truth, what
the truth will do, etc. These seem to be nothing more than arbitrary
assumptions on your part, things that you have simply decided are true.
Post by Feng
I can only manage to
recognize the truth when truth reveals itself.
And you assume you cannot be fooled.
Post by Feng
The truth is always
self-evident. I have no choice but to obey the truth.
So you simply state you are infallible, and cannot be wrong.

I don't believe you.
--
Denis Loubet
***@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
Feng
2007-12-22 17:46:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as
the
New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of correct moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true,
then
Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we started. How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which you use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
How do you know? You can't use the love in your heart to determine if the
love in your heart is not corruptable, because if it was corrupted, it would
tell you it wasn't.
I know it is true by experience. So far it goes, love has never failed
me.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
How can you tell, since I presume you would use it to determine whether it's
corrupted or not. If the love in your heart is corrupted, it might very well
tell you that it's not. Then where would you be?
I know the love in my heart is the Rock I can bet my life on, because
it is also the love in everyone's heart.
How do you know that? Did the love in your heart tell you that? If it's
corrupted, wouldn't you expect it to tell you that?
I don't need to be told by anyone. I know it is true by simple
comparison. I know love in everyone's heart is one and the same.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your
nature
is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
But that's according to your common sense, which you admit is corruptable.
Why would you believe it?
No, the teaching of Christ has nothing to do with my common sense.
You can say that again.
No, you trick me to it. Let me rephrase. The teaching of Christ is a
lot more than simple common sense. Common sense deals with personal
aspect of the truth. The teaching of Christ reveals the whole truth.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
If
you follow the teaching of Christ, you will know his Love. Through his
Love, you will find the truth.
How do you know? If Christ were evil, then that's what you'd expect Christ
to say.
I know because that's what I have learned by experience.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we listen to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible.
Since your "innate knowledge of truth" is part of your human nature, which
you admit is corruptable, then clearly it can be corrupted just like the
rest of your human nature.
Not really. The knowledge of truth can be hidden and forgotten, but it
can never be corrupted to be something else even in the most evil
person on earth. It will always remain true.
How do you know? If you're using corrupted knowledge of truth to determine
that your knowledge of truth is not corrupted, you're hosed. Circular tests
like that mean exactly nothing.
There is no need to do that. Logic always fails the truth because
logic always depends on the truth to begin with in the first place.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
But the search is carried out by a corruptable nature, which I assume would
result in falsehoods being mistaken for truth. And how did you determine
that your inner soul is accurate? Is there some objective test that can be
performed?
Yes. The objective test is the truth itself.
How do you know? How do you determine you know the truth so you can tell if
you know the truth or not?
I don't have to determine anything. I simply open my mind allowing the
truth to reveal itself.
Post by Denis Loubet
Do you know what objective means?
Yes. Objective means giving up the subjective thinking which is what
you are doing.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The searcher does not
determine the truth.
Granted. So why are you assuming you know the truth?
I'm not. I know what I have learned. That is not an assumption.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth will open up the searcher's eyes
instead.
How does the searcher know that what he's experiencing as eye-opening is the
truth?
There is no how. The searcher simply knows.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
That is the reason why it is often called the enlightenment
instead of the discovery.
Many people who have believed themselves to be enlightened have been wrong.
That's unfortunate. Enlightenment does need to be tested by real life
experiences.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be ready to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
But you've learned it all through a corruptable human nature.
Not without the help from the divine.
How do you know the help you receive is from the divine? Wouldn't an evil
entity pretend to be divine to fool you into doing evil?
Because it is not evil, in fact, it helps me to stay away from evil.
That is how I understood the word "Savior".
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
You've just
Post by Denis Loubet
arbitrarily decided that it's true.
That is never a decision for me to make.
Nonsense. You have made many bland assertions concerning the accuracy and
incorruptability of the love in your heart, your knowledge of truth, what
the truth will do, etc. These seem to be nothing more than arbitrary
assumptions on your part, things that you have simply decided are true.
By experience they are things I have simply decided to be true, yes.

Do you have a problem with that?
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I can only manage to
recognize the truth when truth reveals itself.
And you assume you cannot be fooled.
I don't have to assume anything. I have my faith with me.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth is always
self-evident. I have no choice but to obey the truth.
So you simply state you are infallible, and cannot be wrong.
No, that is not what I said. The self-evident truth is infallible. I
can only be a follower of the truth.
Post by Denis Loubet
I don't believe you.
You don't have to. It's the love in your own heart that you have to
believe.
George Walker
2007-12-22 17:56:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
I don't have to assume anything. I have my faith with me.
I wonder? If Christ was executed by the noose, instead of the crusifix, would
Christians be wearing little ropes around their necks instead of crosses?

If Christ was snuffed by the electric chair, would one of them replace the
Crusifix?
Feng
2007-12-22 19:26:26 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 12:56:34 -0500, George Walker
Post by George Walker
Post by Feng
I don't have to assume anything. I have my faith with me.
I wonder? If Christ was executed by the noose, instead of the crusifix, would
Christians be wearing little ropes around their necks instead of crosses?
If Christ was snuffed by the electric chair, would one of them replace the
Crusifix?
I wouldn't know. I'm not into symbolism.
Christopher A.Lee
2007-12-23 00:43:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 12:56:34 -0500, George Walker
Post by George Walker
Post by Feng
I don't have to assume anything. I have my faith with me.
I wonder? If Christ was executed by the noose, instead of the crusifix, would
Christians be wearing little ropes around their necks instead of crosses?
If Christ was snuffed by the electric chair, would one of them replace the
Crusifix?
He was impaled - why do you think his followers are such a pain in the
ass?
Denis Loubet
2007-12-23 08:52:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as
the
New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of
correct
moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true,
then
Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we
started.
How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which
you
use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
How do you know? You can't use the love in your heart to determine if the
love in your heart is not corruptable, because if it was corrupted, it would
tell you it wasn't.
I know it is true by experience. So far it goes, love has never failed
me.
How do you know it was the love? I mean, things do happen without love,
don't they? How do you know love accounts for your experiences? I know you
couldn't have worked up a double-blind test, but did you at least establish
a baseline, and include a control group?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
How can you tell, since I presume you would use it to determine whether it's
corrupted or not. If the love in your heart is corrupted, it might very well
tell you that it's not. Then where would you be?
I know the love in my heart is the Rock I can bet my life on, because
it is also the love in everyone's heart.
How do you know that? Did the love in your heart tell you that? If it's
corrupted, wouldn't you expect it to tell you that?
I don't need to be told by anyone.
Anyone? I'm talking about your heart. Do you consider your heart a separate
entity?
Post by Feng
I know it is true by simple
comparison. I know love in everyone's heart is one and the same.
How do you compare the love in everyone's heart? What do you compare it to?
The love in your heart?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your
nature
is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
But that's according to your common sense, which you admit is corruptable.
Why would you believe it?
No, the teaching of Christ has nothing to do with my common sense.
You can say that again.
No, you trick me to it.
Yes, it was a cheap-shot on my part.
Post by Feng
Let me rephrase. The teaching of Christ is a
lot more than simple common sense. Common sense deals with personal
aspect of the truth. The teaching of Christ reveals the whole truth.
How do you know your personal aspect of the truth is accurate? How do you
know what you believe to be the teachings of Christ are actually the
teachings of Christ?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
If
you follow the teaching of Christ, you will know his Love. Through his
Love, you will find the truth.
How do you know? If Christ were evil, then that's what you'd expect Christ
to say.
I know because that's what I have learned by experience.
But if the Christ is evil, you're saying you know the truth because that's
what evil has taught you.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we
listen
to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible.
Since your "innate knowledge of truth" is part of your human nature, which
you admit is corruptable, then clearly it can be corrupted just like the
rest of your human nature.
Not really. The knowledge of truth can be hidden and forgotten, but it
can never be corrupted to be something else even in the most evil
person on earth. It will always remain true.
How do you know? If you're using corrupted knowledge of truth to determine
that your knowledge of truth is not corrupted, you're hosed. Circular tests
like that mean exactly nothing.
There is no need to do that. Logic always fails the truth because
logic always depends on the truth to begin with in the first place.
If you abandon logic, that leaves you irrational.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
But the search is carried out by a corruptable nature, which I assume would
result in falsehoods being mistaken for truth. And how did you determine
that your inner soul is accurate? Is there some objective test that can be
performed?
Yes. The objective test is the truth itself.
How do you know? How do you determine you know the truth so you can tell if
you know the truth or not?
I don't have to determine anything. I simply open my mind allowing the
truth to reveal itself.
But how do you know what reveals itself is truth? You don't. You just
arbitrarily decide it is, just like you arbitrarily decided that opening
your mind would result in truth revealing itself.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Do you know what objective means?
Yes. Objective means giving up the subjective thinking which is what
you are doing.
No. I have plenty of subjective thoughts and feelings. I just don't claim
that all my thoughts and feelings reflect reality.

Objective does not mean giving up subjective thinking.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The searcher does not
determine the truth.
Granted. So why are you assuming you know the truth?
I'm not. I know what I have learned. That is not an assumption.
It is if you make assumptions like "I simply open my mind allowing the truth
to reveal itself."

You don't know that it's true, you're simply assuming that it is.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth will open up the searcher's eyes
instead.
How does the searcher know that what he's experiencing as eye-opening is the
truth?
There is no how. The searcher simply knows.
He assumes.

I understand.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
That is the reason why it is often called the enlightenment
instead of the discovery.
Many people who have believed themselves to be enlightened have been wrong.
That's unfortunate. Enlightenment does need to be tested by real life
experiences.
You just got finished saying that the searcher simply knows that his
eye-opening experience is the thruth.

Now you say it needs to be tested by real life.

Which is it?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be
ready
to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
But you've learned it all through a corruptable human nature.
Not without the help from the divine.
How do you know the help you receive is from the divine? Wouldn't an evil
entity pretend to be divine to fool you into doing evil?
Because it is not evil, in fact, it helps me to stay away from evil.
How do you know? Perhaps you are being fooled into thinking that what you
are doing is good, when it's actually evil.
Post by Feng
That is how I understood the word "Savior".
I think that evil pretending to be a savior would be a good way to fool
people into following evil. Don't you?
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
You've just
Post by Denis Loubet
arbitrarily decided that it's true.
That is never a decision for me to make.
Nonsense. You have made many bland assertions concerning the accuracy and
incorruptability of the love in your heart, your knowledge of truth, what
the truth will do, etc. These seem to be nothing more than arbitrary
assumptions on your part, things that you have simply decided are true.
By experience they are things I have simply decided to be true, yes.
Does this "experience" consist of "simply knowing"? How have you determined
that the accuracy and incorruptability of the love in your heart, your
knowledge of truth, what the truth will do, etc, is responsible for your
experiences?
Post by Feng
Do you have a problem with that?
I have a problem with your whole approach. You have admitted to being
deliberately irrational, so don't blame me for looking suspiciously at your
claims of experience. If you don't approve of logic, then I cannot trust
your inferrences, and there's really nothing anyone can say to you that's
not a waste of breath.

By abandoning logic, you immunize yourself from all other ideas. You have
chosen a path that closes your mind.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I can only manage to
recognize the truth when truth reveals itself.
And you assume you cannot be fooled.
I don't have to assume anything. I have my faith with me.
Faith only means that if you're wrong, you're determined to remain wrong.

Faith means you've closed your mind to the possibility that you can be
wrong.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth is always
self-evident. I have no choice but to obey the truth.
So you simply state you are infallible, and cannot be wrong.
No, that is not what I said.
Yes it is. That is the inevitable implication of your statement.
Post by Feng
The self-evident truth is infallible. I
can only be a follower of the truth.
No, the self-evident truth is often completely wrong. And faith merely
enshrines the wrongness.
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
I don't believe you.
You don't have to. It's the love in your own heart that you have to
believe.
My experiences tell me not to trust it. That is why I use tools like logic.
They work.
--
Denis Loubet
***@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
Feng
2007-12-23 21:24:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as
the
New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this
issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Can you translate that for non-wackos?
No problem.
According to the judgment of common sense in life, anyone who asks you
to kill your own son for his pleasure is evil. When a god asks you to
kill your own son for his pleasure, it should be obvious to you that
such god is the Devil instead of God.
This assertion presumes that flawed, sinning Man is capable of
correct
moral
judgement in the absence of a divinely-inspired standard. If true,
then
Man
would have no need for divine guidance.
That statement presumes the divinely-inspired standard is absent in
the human nature which is supposed to be a creation of God.
I will agree that sin does corrupt the human nature, but it should
also be obvious that the human nature does survive the corruption and
destruction of sin throughout the human history.
So, if common sense can be corrupted, then we're back where we
started.
How
do you determine what's "the light of truth" if common sense, which
you
use
as your yardstick, is corruptable?
The love in my heart and everyone's heart. That is the yardstick my
common sense is based on.
So the love in your heart is absolutely not corruptable?
As far as I know, that is true so far.
How do you know? You can't use the love in your heart to determine if the
love in your heart is not corruptable, because if it was corrupted, it would
tell you it wasn't.
I know it is true by experience. So far it goes, love has never failed
me.
How do you know it was the love? I mean, things do happen without love,
don't they? How do you know love accounts for your experiences? I know you
couldn't have worked up a double-blind test, but did you at least establish
a baseline, and include a control group?
I know I'm talking about the experience of my life, but what are you
talking about?
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
How can you tell, since I presume you would use it to determine whether it's
corrupted or not. If the love in your heart is corrupted, it might very well
tell you that it's not. Then where would you be?
I know the love in my heart is the Rock I can bet my life on, because
it is also the love in everyone's heart.
How do you know that? Did the love in your heart tell you that? If it's
corrupted, wouldn't you expect it to tell you that?
I don't need to be told by anyone.
Anyone? I'm talking about your heart. Do you consider your heart a separate
entity?
No, I don't. By anyone, I mean I don't need to be told by people like
you or anyone else. I know my heart and that's it. The heart does not
lie.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I know it is true by simple
comparison. I know love in everyone's heart is one and the same.
How do you compare the love in everyone's heart? What do you compare it to?
The love in your heart?
Yes. The love in everyone's heart is always the same. All you need is
to look.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Could it be because the human nature does possess certain innate
knowledge about the truth?
Irrelevant, even if it were true. You can't know the truth if your
nature
is
corruptable. If you had the truth, it would only be by accident.
Thanks to Jesus Christ, that problem has already been solved. Anyone
who follows the teaching of Christ can always find the truth thorough
his Love.
But that's according to your common sense, which you admit is corruptable.
Why would you believe it?
No, the teaching of Christ has nothing to do with my common sense.
You can say that again.
No, you trick me to it.
Yes, it was a cheap-shot on my part.
Glad you admit it.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Let me rephrase. The teaching of Christ is a
lot more than simple common sense. Common sense deals with personal
aspect of the truth. The teaching of Christ reveals the whole truth.
How do you know your personal aspect of the truth is accurate? How do you
know what you believe to be the teachings of Christ are actually the
teachings of Christ?
By experience. I know it is true because I have the actual experience
of my life as the proof.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
If
you follow the teaching of Christ, you will know his Love. Through his
Love, you will find the truth.
How do you know? If Christ were evil, then that's what you'd expect Christ
to say.
I know because that's what I have learned by experience.
But if the Christ is evil, you're saying you know the truth because that's
what evil has taught you.
Christ is never evil. If you see evil, you are not seeing Christ. In
fact, you are seeing the enemy of Christ.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I think so.
But, as you insist, your nature is corruptable. So why should we
listen
to
anything you have to say?
Just because the human nature is corruptible, doesn't mean the innate
knowledge of truth in our human nature is corruptible.
Since your "innate knowledge of truth" is part of your human nature, which
you admit is corruptable, then clearly it can be corrupted just like the
rest of your human nature.
Not really. The knowledge of truth can be hidden and forgotten, but it
can never be corrupted to be something else even in the most evil
person on earth. It will always remain true.
How do you know? If you're using corrupted knowledge of truth to determine
that your knowledge of truth is not corrupted, you're hosed. Circular tests
like that mean exactly nothing.
There is no need to do that. Logic always fails the truth because
logic always depends on the truth to begin with in the first place.
If you abandon logic, that leaves you irrational.
I'm not abandoning logic. I recognize the limitation of logic.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth can
always be realized by searching and inquiring into our inner soul.
But the search is carried out by a corruptable nature, which I assume would
result in falsehoods being mistaken for truth. And how did you determine
that your inner soul is accurate? Is there some objective test that can be
performed?
Yes. The objective test is the truth itself.
How do you know? How do you determine you know the truth so you can tell if
you know the truth or not?
I don't have to determine anything. I simply open my mind allowing the
truth to reveal itself.
But how do you know what reveals itself is truth? You don't. You just
arbitrarily decide it is, just like you arbitrarily decided that opening
your mind would result in truth revealing itself.
No. I don't need to decide it is the truth. I only need to recognize
it is the truth. Can you see the difference?
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Do you know what objective means?
Yes. Objective means giving up the subjective thinking which is what
you are doing.
No. I have plenty of subjective thoughts and feelings. I just don't claim
that all my thoughts and feelings reflect reality.
Objective does not mean giving up subjective thinking.
Objective does mean giving up the subjective thinking that is trying
to determine the truth. The truth is not determined by intellectual
thinking. The truth is only realized by giving up the intellectual
thoughts.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The searcher does not
determine the truth.
Granted. So why are you assuming you know the truth?
I'm not. I know what I have learned. That is not an assumption.
It is if you make assumptions like "I simply open my mind allowing the truth
to reveal itself."
You don't know that it's true, you're simply assuming that it is.
That's because you assume I have never experienced the truth. You are
wrong.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth will open up the searcher's eyes
instead.
How does the searcher know that what he's experiencing as eye-opening is the
truth?
There is no how. The searcher simply knows.
He assumes.
I understand.
No, you don't.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
That is the reason why it is often called the enlightenment
instead of the discovery.
Many people who have believed themselves to be enlightened have been wrong.
That's unfortunate. Enlightenment does need to be tested by real life
experiences.
You just got finished saying that the searcher simply knows that his
eye-opening experience is the thruth.
Now you say it needs to be tested by real life.
Which is it?
Both. The experience of truth does not happen without real life
experience. It only happens in real life.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Feng
Now, if you can reach such conclusion while reading the Old Testament,
you will have graduated from the class of Old Testament to be
ready
to
receive higher understandings of the truth.
Do you mean "the truth" or "the Truth?"
I don't make that distinction since the human mind can not understand
the Truth without the truth.
How convenient.
No, it's simply a matter of fact according to what I have learned.
But you've learned it all through a corruptable human nature.
Not without the help from the divine.
How do you know the help you receive is from the divine? Wouldn't an evil
entity pretend to be divine to fool you into doing evil?
Because it is not evil, in fact, it helps me to stay away from evil.
How do you know? Perhaps you are being fooled into thinking that what you
are doing is good, when it's actually evil.
That is impossible according to the experience of my life.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
That is how I understood the word "Savior".
I think that evil pretending to be a savior would be a good way to fool
people into following evil. Don't you?
Absolutely, except my Savior is never evil.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
You've just
Post by Denis Loubet
arbitrarily decided that it's true.
That is never a decision for me to make.
Nonsense. You have made many bland assertions concerning the accuracy and
incorruptability of the love in your heart, your knowledge of truth, what
the truth will do, etc. These seem to be nothing more than arbitrary
assumptions on your part, things that you have simply decided are true.
By experience they are things I have simply decided to be true, yes.
Does this "experience" consist of "simply knowing"? How have you determined
that the accuracy and incorruptability of the love in your heart, your
knowledge of truth, what the truth will do, etc, is responsible for your
experiences?
I don't have to determine anything. I simply live my life and realize
the truth.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Do you have a problem with that?
I have a problem with your whole approach. You have admitted to being
deliberately irrational, so don't blame me for looking suspiciously at your
claims of experience. If you don't approve of logic, then I cannot trust
your inferrences, and there's really nothing anyone can say to you that's
not a waste of breath.
By abandoning logic, you immunize yourself from all other ideas. You have
chosen a path that closes your mind.
That's your misunderstanding. I'm not abandoning logic. I simply
recognize the limitation of logic.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
I can only manage to
recognize the truth when truth reveals itself.
And you assume you cannot be fooled.
I don't have to assume anything. I have my faith with me.
Faith only means that if you're wrong, you're determined to remain wrong.
Faith means you've closed your mind to the possibility that you can be
wrong.
Not at all. You are describing the blind faith. My faith is not blind
because it is based on the love of Jesus Christ.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The truth is always
self-evident. I have no choice but to obey the truth.
So you simply state you are infallible, and cannot be wrong.
No, that is not what I said.
Yes it is. That is the inevitable implication of your statement.
The truth I have learned is infallible. That does not mean I'm
infallible.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
The self-evident truth is infallible. I
can only be a follower of the truth.
No, the self-evident truth is often completely wrong. And faith merely
enshrines the wrongness.
If truth can be wrong, then it can't be truth in the first place, not
to mention being self-evident.
Post by Denis Loubet
Post by Feng
Post by Denis Loubet
I don't believe you.
You don't have to. It's the love in your own heart that you have to
believe.
My experiences tell me not to trust it. That is why I use tools like logic.
They work.
Logic only works within the truth. It will always fail without the
truth.
Simpson
2007-12-21 17:01:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
Post by Feng
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
John Manning
2007-12-21 18:10:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the
New Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
Post by Feng
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Here's a lovely, inspirational Old Testament story about that sweet man,
Moses:

- Under God's direction, Moses' army defeats the Midianites. They kill
all the adult males, but take the women and children captive.

When Moses learns that they left some live, he angrily says: "Have you
saved all the women alive? Kill every male among the little ones, and
kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the
women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive
for yourselves."

So they went back and did as Moses (and presumably God) instructed,
killing everyone except for the virgins. In this way they got 32,000
virgins -- Wow!

Bible: Numbers 31:1-54
Zeno
2007-12-21 17:12:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
"Authority" ?

Is the "self righteous" condition exclusive to religious extremist?
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Al Smith
2007-12-21 18:30:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
The Brothers Grimm ... who are both dead.

-Al-
Feng
2007-12-22 00:10:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Under the light of truth, according to the judgment of good and evil
based on the truth, there can be very good understandings about the
Old Testament.
Dwayne Hoobler
2007-12-22 01:06:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?

I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
Feng
2007-12-22 01:37:19 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Dwayne Hoobler
2007-12-22 01:55:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
I concur with you, but the Hellish existence is one of the present; not of one
beyond the grave. It's easier to believe in Ying / Yang than that gibberish!

Why do these freaks make fun of Islamic fundamentalists and the legend of the
72 virgins as a reward, when they are preached about and often believe in
superstitious nonsense of another kind?

Sure, The Exorcist movie was pretty impressive when Max von Sydow (as Father
Lankester Merrin) and Jason Miller (as Father Damien Karras) were shouting at
the top of their lungs "THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU!" repeatedly.

That's entertainment. But that's all it is.
Feng
2007-12-22 04:48:03 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:55:24 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
I concur with you, but the Hellish existence is one of the present; not of one
beyond the grave. It's easier to believe in Ying / Yang than that gibberish!
Why do these freaks make fun of Islamic fundamentalists and the legend of the
72 virgins as a reward, when they are preached about and often believe in
superstitious nonsense of another kind?
Sure, The Exorcist movie was pretty impressive when Max von Sydow (as Father
Lankester Merrin) and Jason Miller (as Father Damien Karras) were shouting at
the top of their lungs "THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU!" repeatedly.
That's entertainment. But that's all it is.
I agree with you that here on earth is a living hell right at this
moment, but I would not consider the so called afterlife nothing but
superstitious nonsense just yet. Granted, the thing about 72 virgins
is an obvious lie, but the hell of bottomless pit as well as the
eternal fire are things I do believe to exist.
Simpson
2007-12-22 04:37:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
Feng
2007-12-22 05:22:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
Dwayne Hoobler
2007-12-22 05:37:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
Acting as a human is always good. I don't rely on superstitious threats from
an imaginary ghost in the sky to reform my notions.
Feng
2007-12-22 17:15:41 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:37:43 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
Acting as a human is always good. I don't rely on superstitious threats from
an imaginary ghost in the sky to reform my notions.
Don't worry, there is no such thing.
Dwayne Hoobler
2007-12-22 17:24:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
n Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:37:43 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
Acting as a human is always good. I don't rely on superstitious threats from
an imaginary ghost in the sky to reform my notions.
Don't worry, there is no such thing.
I've never worried about superstition.

Out! Demon Spirits! Out! I Say!


Yeah, that's the ticket.
Al Smith
2007-12-22 05:47:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
But maybe the sex is really, really good.

-Al-
Feng
2007-12-22 17:18:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Smith
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
But maybe the sex is really, really good.
-Al-
How do you know? Talking from experience or imagination?
Dwayne Hoobler
2007-12-22 17:33:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Al Smith
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
But maybe the sex is really, really good.
-Al-
How do you know? Talking from experience or imagination?
God is an invisible ghost in the sky who is built in my image (49 years-old,
clean shaven, 6' 4', white, good ice skater, brown hair, one kid, brown eyes,
8" penis) , so sayeth The Bible.


It's a matter of record!
Feng
2007-12-22 18:06:39 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 12:33:56 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Al Smith
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss. In fact, it can not be compared. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
But maybe the sex is really, really good.
-Al-
How do you know? Talking from experience or imagination?
God is an invisible ghost in the sky who is built in my image (49 years-old,
clean shaven, 6' 4', white, good ice skater, brown hair, one kid, brown eyes,
8" penis) , so sayeth The Bible.
That is why you are wrong.
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
It's a matter of record!
I thought you knew it was superstition. What's up? Why do you believe
the superstition now?
Simpson
2007-12-23 01:37:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.

You've never been to heaven.

In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
Feng
2007-12-23 02:47:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
Post by Simpson
In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
Michael Gray
2007-12-23 03:19:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
Oh, the tired old logical fallacy.
Ho hum.
I hope that your ward nurse gives you some extra thorazine for
christams.
Feng
2007-12-23 05:14:11 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:49:18 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
Oh, the tired old logical fallacy.
Why is it a fallacy? Because heaven is nothing you can imagine?
Post by Michael Gray
Ho hum.
I hope that your ward nurse gives you some extra thorazine for
christams.
Don't worry. My mental condition is completely normal.
Michael Gray
2007-12-23 06:27:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:49:18 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
Oh, the tired old logical fallacy.
Why is it a fallacy? Because heaven is nothing you can imagine?
The logical fallacy of the straw man.
And that of tu quoque.
And that of ad baculum.
And that of the false dichotomy.
Post by Feng
Post by Michael Gray
Ho hum.
I hope that your ward nurse gives you some extra thorazine for
christams.
Don't worry. My mental condition is completely normal.
In your ward of the insane asylum, I can understand that.

You need professional help for your profound mental disturbances.
Feng
2007-12-23 08:20:04 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:57:45 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:49:18 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
Oh, the tired old logical fallacy.
Why is it a fallacy? Because heaven is nothing you can imagine?
The logical fallacy of the straw man.
And that of tu quoque.
And that of ad baculum.
And that of the false dichotomy.
Sorry, none of them applies since I have not prejudged the guy. Not
like him, I only asked a question, and I'm still waiting for him to
answer. If his answer condemns himself, that can not be my fallacy.
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Michael Gray
Ho hum.
I hope that your ward nurse gives you some extra thorazine for
christams.
Don't worry. My mental condition is completely normal.
In your ward of the insane asylum, I can understand that.
You need professional help for your profound mental disturbances.
Sounds serious enough. What is your proof about my profound mental
disturbances?
Michael Gray
2007-12-23 09:02:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:57:45 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:49:18 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
Oh, the tired old logical fallacy.
Why is it a fallacy? Because heaven is nothing you can imagine?
The logical fallacy of the straw man.
And that of tu quoque.
And that of ad baculum.
And that of the false dichotomy.
Sorry, none of them applies since I have not prejudged the guy.
Bullshit!
All of them apply, irrespective of your "professed" intent.
(Which I don't believe for a minute)
Post by Feng
Not
like him, I only asked a question, and I'm still waiting for him to
answer.
How utterly dishonest!
You plainly the asked a banal question in order to evade the burden of
providing a coherent reply:!
(Which you seem utterly incapable of providing)
Post by Feng
If his answer condemns himself, that can not be my fallacy.
Anoither "Straw Man" Fallacy!!
Just how much straw do you have in your closet of deception?
Post by Feng
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Michael Gray
Ho hum.
I hope that your ward nurse gives you some extra thorazine for
christams.
Don't worry. My mental condition is completely normal.
In your ward of the insane asylum, I can understand that.
You need professional help for your profound mental disturbances.
Sounds serious enough.
Yes, it does, and is.
Post by Feng
What is your proof about my profound mental
disturbances?
Get a competant psychologist to review your posts, and you shall have
evidence enough.
Simpson
2007-12-23 04:25:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.

Are you an exception?

Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
Feng
2007-12-23 05:04:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
Michael Gray
2007-12-23 06:28:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
Feng
2007-12-23 08:28:01 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
Darrell Stec
2007-12-23 08:59:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight
as the New Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding
this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the
Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who
claim that morality cannot exist without the religious valued
threat of a Hellish existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The
threat of hellish existence is both real and present, but it is
not to keep morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to
destroy morality to bring humanity to that hellish existence. The
only mistake they made is to believe the threat is from God, when
in fact it is from the Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
Then I take it you will not having any trouble proving this god of yours
exists and anything you credit to him is not in fact the work of Isis?
Take all the space you need. We eagerly await your evidence. Note that it
must be testable and attributed to only one source.
--
Later,
Darrell Stec ***@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages
Feng
2007-12-23 21:28:04 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 03:59:29 -0500, Darrell Stec
Post by Darrell Stec
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight
as the New Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding
this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the
Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who
claim that morality cannot exist without the religious valued
threat of a Hellish existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The
threat of hellish existence is both real and present, but it is
not to keep morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to
destroy morality to bring humanity to that hellish existence. The
only mistake they made is to believe the threat is from God, when
in fact it is from the Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
Then I take it you will not having any trouble proving this god of yours
exists and anything you credit to him is not in fact the work of Isis?
Take all the space you need. We eagerly await your evidence. Note that it
must be testable and attributed to only one source.
Sorry, request denied.
Darrell Stec
2007-12-23 22:17:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 03:59:29 -0500, Darrell Stec
Post by Darrell Stec
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:44:52 -0800, Simpson
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much
weight as the New Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding
this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the
Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For
the ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in
life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people
who claim that morality cannot exist without the religious
valued threat of a Hellish existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The
threat of hellish existence is both real and present, but it is
not to keep morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to
destroy morality to bring humanity to that hellish existence.
The only mistake they made is to believe the threat is from God,
when in fact it is from the Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing
when compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
Then I take it you will not having any trouble proving this god of yours
exists and anything you credit to him is not in fact the work of Isis?
Take all the space you need. We eagerly await your evidence. Note that
it must be testable and attributed to only one source.
Sorry, request denied.
That was not unexpected. Those who have no proof, provide none. The only
person you are fooling is yourself.
--
Later,
Darrell Stec ***@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages
Michael Gray
2007-12-23 09:05:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
If that puerile response is what you consider "proof", then you are
more mentally incoherent than I had first thought.

Where (precisely) is this proof of this (singular) fantasitical
imaginary god of yours?

Who's hallucinating now?
Feng
2007-12-23 21:33:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:35:19 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
If that puerile response is what you consider "proof", then you are
more mentally incoherent than I had first thought.
Where (precisely) is this proof of this (singular) fantasitical
imaginary god of yours?
The proof is all around you in your own life. All you need is to look.
Post by Michael Gray
Who's hallucinating now?
DanielSan
2007-12-23 21:35:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:35:19 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
If that puerile response is what you consider "proof", then you are
more mentally incoherent than I had first thought.
Where (precisely) is this proof of this (singular) fantasitical
imaginary god of yours?
The proof is all around you in your own life. All you need is to look.
It is thundering right now. Proof enough for me to admit that Thor is
the one true god.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
Feng
2007-12-23 22:11:35 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:35:12 -0800, DanielSan
Post by DanielSan
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:35:19 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
If that puerile response is what you consider "proof", then you are
more mentally incoherent than I had first thought.
Where (precisely) is this proof of this (singular) fantasitical
imaginary god of yours?
The proof is all around you in your own life. All you need is to look.
It is thundering right now. Proof enough for me to admit that Thor is
the one true god.
In other word, by power you recognize your god. Sorry, my God is love.
I recognize my God through love instead.
DanielSan
2007-12-23 22:20:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:35:12 -0800, DanielSan
Post by DanielSan
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:35:19 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
If that puerile response is what you consider "proof", then you are
more mentally incoherent than I had first thought.
Where (precisely) is this proof of this (singular) fantasitical
imaginary god of yours?
The proof is all around you in your own life. All you need is to look.
It is thundering right now. Proof enough for me to admit that Thor is
the one true god.
In other word, by power you recognize your god. Sorry, my God is love.
I recognize my God through love instead.
"Hey, hey, hey, Feng. NNNNNEEEYYYYYEEOW!"
(Apologies to Jeff Dunham)


(About 6:35 in)
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
Michael Gray
2007-12-23 22:43:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
In other word, by power you recognize your god. Sorry, my God is love.
I recognize my God through love instead.
That sentence is entirely incoherent.
Simpson
2007-12-24 02:04:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:35:12 -0800, DanielSan
Post by DanielSan
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:35:19 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:58:49 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
What: That this bullshit "god" of yours is a juvenile unprovable
fantasy?
I think you really should cut back on using drugs. You are
hallucinating.
If that puerile response is what you consider "proof", then you are
more mentally incoherent than I had first thought.
Where (precisely) is this proof of this (singular) fantasitical
imaginary god of yours?
The proof is all around you in your own life. All you need is to look.
It is thundering right now. Proof enough for me to admit that Thor is
the one true god.
In other word, by power you recognize your god. Sorry, my God is love.
I recognize my God through love instead.
Your God is arrogance. You are not projecting love, but arrogance...
plain for all to see but you, a sure indication of arrogance.

Michael Gray
2007-12-23 22:42:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:35:19 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
Where (precisely) is this proof of this (singular) fantasitical
imaginary god of yours?
The proof is all around you in your own life. All you need is to look.
How utterly pathetic and depressingly infantile.
I *have* looked, and can find nothing at all that serves as proof.

Be an adult, and admit that you have no proof whatsoever.
Simpson
2007-12-23 17:55:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding *what you *believe* to be the truth of God.
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
Simpson
2007-12-23 18:00:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
So you're saying that learning about the truth of God is matter of *luck*?

I wonder what God thinks of you equating His divine grace with a roll of
the dice. Wait, I'll ask Him.................



God says you're an arrogant fool.
Post by Simpson
CORRECTION: regarding *what you *believe* to be the truth of God.
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
Feng
2007-12-23 21:41:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
So you're saying that learning about the truth of God is matter of *luck*?
I wonder what God thinks of you equating His divine grace with a roll of
the dice. Wait, I'll ask Him.................
God says you're an arrogant fool.
Yes, I agree.

Considering the chances of learning the truth, lucky is a mild word.
It's incomprehensible favor and unbelievable trust. It's absolutely
crazy!
Post by Simpson
Post by Simpson
CORRECTION: regarding *what you *believe* to be the truth of God.
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
Feng
2007-12-23 21:44:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding *what you *believe* to be the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding what I know to be the truth of God with absolute
certainty.
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
In fact, it can not be compared. The
Post by Feng
difference is between heaven and hell.
DanielSan
2007-12-23 21:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding *what you *believe* to be the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding what I know to be the truth of God with absolute
certainty.
Feng, read Job 38. It has wise advice for folks like you...folks like Job.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
Feng
2007-12-23 22:22:21 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:48:26 -0800, DanielSan
Post by DanielSan
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding *what you *believe* to be the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding what I know to be the truth of God with absolute
certainty.
Feng, read Job 38. It has wise advice for folks like you...folks like Job.
Yep. That's very impressive deceptive work of the Devil. Poor Job.
DanielSan
2007-12-23 22:34:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:48:26 -0800, DanielSan
Post by DanielSan
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:06:39 -0500, Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Dwayne Hoobler
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Agreed, but aren't you dubious about the intentions of people who claim that
morality cannot exist without the religious valued threat of a Hellish
existence in "the Afterlife"?
I don't need imaginary threats like that to live a moral existence.
You are correct, and they are not entirely wrong either. The threat of
hellish existence is both real and present, but it is not to keep
morality. Quite the opposite, its purpose is to destroy morality to
bring humanity to that hellish existence. The only mistake they made
is to believe the threat is from God, when in fact it is from the
Devil.
Then the promise of 72 virgins must come from God.
God's promise is far greater than that. Carnal lust is nothing when
compared with the heavenly bliss.
How in the hell do *you* know.
You've never been to heaven.
How in the hell do *you* know?
When I was exposed to Christianity in my youth I was taught that only
the dead get into heaven... except for Jesus of course. But Jesus was God.
Do you always believe what you are told?
Post by Simpson
Are you an exception?
Or are you arrogant enough to consider yourself God, too?
Not at all. I'm just an ordinary human being who is lucky enough to
have learned a thing or two regarding the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding *what you *believe* to be the truth of God.
CORRECTION: regarding what I know to be the truth of God with absolute
certainty.
Feng, read Job 38. It has wise advice for folks like you...folks like Job.
Yep. That's very impressive deceptive work of the Devil. Poor Job.
Just as you're being deceived right now. :-)
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
Christopher A.Lee
2007-12-22 09:02:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Post by Feng
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
There is nothing wrong with the Old Testament, except how we
understand it.
Then who is the authority on the correct understanding of the Old Testament?
In my opinion, for the learned scholars, it's the truth. For the
ordinary people like myself, it's the common sense in life.
Only for pig-ignorant morons like you who neither know what "truth"
nor "common sense" mean.

What is it with you idiots?

Why don't you show some honesty for a change?
V
2007-12-21 04:13:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I don't think they do give the OT as much weight as the NT.

We can ask the question Would the 'ideal' of a perfect, all loving God
approve of the Hebrew and Christian God Yahweh?

No, the ideal of God would not approve of God if the old testament is
a true accounting of Yahweh. The evidence shows that the God of the
monotheists as written in the bible is a man made story, whether it is
the story of Jesus or the God Yahweh of the Hebrews.

I write this after being a Catholic for 50+ years. What caused my
change in heart about God? Was it God's refusal to answer a self
centered prayer...No. Was it all the evil in the world...No. My change
in heart with my belief in God came from 'real study' of the dogma and
the books claimed to be the written words of God with a desire to get
closer to God. But, the more I studied, the further from God my
studies took me. But this is only a by product of the study of truth,
for if the study leads to a certain direction one must follow it, if
one is truth based. And if one is not truth based one makes up fantasy
and excuses and lives a delusional life.

If we look at logical and philosophical arguments for God they add up
to zero as each one of these arguments can be argued for or against
God

Ontological Argument +
Ontological Argument (--)
Cosmological Argument +
Cosmological Argument (--)
Teleological Argument +
Teleological Argument (--)
-----------------------------------------
Total = ZERO

As such, we need to look deeper into what the various religions of the
monotheist say to find the truth. There are four books claiming to be
the word of God. they are the Old Testament, New Testament, Qur'an and
the Book of Mormon. (OT, NT, Q and BOM) All these books conflict, yet
all claim to be the perfect word of God? Why doesn't God make clear
which one of these books to follow so there is no misunderstanding?
After all, a mistake in direction yield everlasting torture in hell?
Since God wont answer, we will have to answer for God by asking some
questions to get at the truth that God was invented by man. In short
we will judge God by the ideals of God. Then we can see clearly these
words of God were not written by an all perfect and all loving, all
good God but were just written by men claiming to be God.

Some religious advocates say it is presumptuous of anyone to 'judge'
God. But, such persons also judge God when they say God is good? In
order to judge something good it must still be judged? From my
studies, I have judged God as a creation or fantasy of man's mind and
a God that would refuse to tell the direction for a person to take and
then take joy in torturing that person for a mistake that the person
could not avoid is definitely bad.

God was no always so silent with direction. If we go back to the OT we
can see God communicated extensively with the Hebrews. God directed
them specifically with how to design and build things and how to
worship him through burnt offerings and penance. God was very detailed
with his directions about unclean women during menses and how the
Hebrews should keep their slaves. All quotes courtesy of http://www.evilbible.com/
(BTW, they banned me from their forums...so much for freethinkers.)

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that
the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the
slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the
slave is his own property." Exodus 21:20-21

God approving of slavery? God not approving of the Egyptians keeping
slaves yet is OK for the Hebrews to keep slaves? Again not a perfect
God. If we read further we will see God very bigoted and condemning of
all other nationalities except his chosen people the Hebrews. What
makes the world think such a bigoted God would accept them when God
had such hatred for others he supposedly created?

If we go to more modern times and the Christian dogma where God
offered his son to be tortured and killed in order for God to forgive
our sins? What do we do when we forgive another? Do we kill our son or
daughter or just forgive? How much more a perfect God could have just
forgiven us without killing his son? But God seemed to emphasize the
killing children in his words to his faithful as we can see in these
OT quotes.

"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the
city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy;
have no pity! Kill them all - old and young, girls and women and
little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your
task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy
leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards
with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the
city and did as they were told." Ezekiel 9:5-7

"The glory of Israel will fly away like a bird, for your children will
die at birth or perish in the womb or never even be conceived. Even
if your children do survive to grow up, I will take them from you. It
will be a terrible day when I turn away and leave you alone. I have
watched Israel become as beautiful and pleasant as Tyre. But now
Israel will bring out her children to be slaughtered." O LORD, what
should I request for your people? I will ask for wombs that don't
give birth and breasts that give no milk. The LORD says, "All their
wickedness began at Gilgal; there I began to hate them. I will drive
them from my land because of their evil actions. I will love them no
more because all their leaders are rebels. The people of Israel are
stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit.
And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children."
Hosea 9:11-16

"Suppose a man has a stubborn, rebellious son who will not obey his
father or mother, even though they discipline him. In such cases, the
father and mother must take the son before the leaders of the town.
They must declare: 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and
refuses to obey. He is a worthless drunkard.' Then all the men of the
town must stone him to death. In this way, you will cleanse this evil
from among you, and all Israel will hear about it and be afraid."
Deuteronomy 21:18-21

What happened to this vocal God that seemed to die with the authors
of the Old Testament, for no one ever hears a peep from God? Did God
die with the writers? BTW, if God was a perfect designer, should he
have not made women 'unclean' and not have menses and that way God
could have saved some breath and cut his 600+ commandants to the
Hebrew down by one? See: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~adamgosp/otcomm.htm

God even commanded the people how to bake bread, (with human
excrement) discriminate against the handicapped, kill the faithful of
other religions and how much money to pay to rape young women.

Each day prepare your bread as you would barley cakes. While all the
people are watching, bake it over a fire using dried human dung as
fuel and then eat the bread. For this is what the LORD says: "Israel
will eat defiled bread in the Gentile lands, where I will banish
them!" Then I said, "O Sovereign LORD, must I be defiled by using
human dung? For I have never been defiled before. From the time I was
a child until now I have never eaten any animal that died of sickness
or that I found dead. And I have never eaten any of the animals that
our laws forbid." "All right," the LORD said. "You may bake your
bread with cow dung instead of human dung." Ezekiel 4:12-15

"No one whose testicles have been crushed or whose penis has been cut
off may be admitted into the community of the Lord." Deuteronomy
23:2

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not
engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he
must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never
be allowed to divorce her." Deuteronomy 22:28-29

"If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved
wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other
gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other
nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the
other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon
him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the
first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with
you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you
astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of
Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall
fear and never do such evil as this in your midst." Deuteronomy
13:7-12

Yes, the writers for God's word will be able to show you how the God
they claim to be perfect is not perfect and just an extension of
imperfect man's mind. If you read the bible with an open mind that is
logical and rational you will see this for yourself. It is only when
we make excuses for God that God is relieved from being a true God.

In the OT it says God is a 'jealous God' and requires worship.

"You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in
the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the
earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the
Lord, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their
father's wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the
third and fourth generation" Exodus 20:4-5

Once someone 'requires' anything outside themselves the persons peace
will be disturbed. Yet the popular belief that God is perfect...the
two (jealousy and perfection) don't go together. In addition such a
God would not pass the peace test. If the God did not receive worship
the God's peace would be disturbed from having demands and not getting
those demands fulfilled. Then the God would have its peace disturbed
even further by torturing the person for everlasting eternity since
that person did not provide the worship the God demanded. Does all
this smack of a perfect being, perfectly at peace or just man
impersonating God

See:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=133.0

You see, many people do with religion and their religious fixations
the same as the compulsive gambler does with their fantasy.

Excerpt From: Gamblers Anonymous pamphlet "The dream world of a
compulsive gambler." A lot of time is spent creating images of great
and wonderful things they are going to do as soon as they make "the
big win."... No one can convince them that their great schemes will
not come true. They believe they will, for without this dream world,
life for them would not be tolerable.

The truth is that which does not change. Man made religion is always
changing. This phenomena of putting a spin on truth goes back to the
earliest formations of the church when it was voted on by presumptuous
individuals as to how to describe God and the trinity. You see it was
all voted on and the proponent that had the 'best spin' on it got the
credit for Nicene Creed. But in reality no one has a clew about this
subject. Want a modern day example of such spiritual sickness, spin
and lies?

"Roman Catholic Church Considers Abolishing Limbo Theory" A commission
that met at the Vatican last week is expected to recommend to Pope
Benedict XVI that the teaching of limbo be dropped. The Roman Catholic
Church may abolish the concept of limbo - the place some Catholics
believe the spirit of babies go if they die before being baptized

Snip from: http://www.christianpost.com/article/20051209/22492.htm

But it is impossible to have a rational discussion with most religious
devotees when they insist on irrationality as their first line of
defense. We are rational beings, logical beings, yet belief in God can
only come about through irrational, non logical thought. Would a God
that created rational, logical beings require such beings to follow
irrational fantasy in order to believe in him? An example? While
discussing fossils and ancient coal with a Christian he claimed that
fossils and ancient coal are not really old and 'planted by the devil'
to trick people from believing in God? this also recalls the book of
Enoch, a book that was left out of the bible by the powers that
decided what went into it when it was first formed. This book
described many fantastic claims about how Eve was tricked by the devil
masquerading as an angel. Would God create such subterfuge as planted
fake fossils in order to trick his loved ones only to condom them to
burning and torture for all eternity in hell because they cannot find
out the rational and logical truth? Yes, such an unjust God would if
your God is that of a sickly, delusional, religious devotee that
believe is such fantasy.

Even when we discuss the story of Jesus, is it rational for God to
have to kill his only begotten son in order to forgive us? What do we
do when we forgive another? Do we kill our mother, son or daughter in
order to forgive another person? Yet, Christians cling to this
fantasy. Jesus was never born on December 25 and in fact there is no
evidence Jesus was ever born at all. Christians adopted Christmas from
the pagan December 25 holiday in order to promote their own agenda,
just as they did with Halloween.

For further discussion of the Jesus myth see:

http://www.vexen.co.uk/books/jesusmysteries.html
http://www.atheists.org/christianity/myth.html
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/fabrication.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_as_myth
http://home.ca.inter.net/~oblio/home.htm
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/7748/106446
http://www.abc.net.au/religion/stories/s1517078.htm
http://www.atheist-community.org/library/articles/read.php?id=700
http://www.christianorigins.com/goguel/
http://www.bede.org.uk/price1.htm
http://www.objectivethought.com/atheism/jesusmyth.html
http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/jesus.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/historicus/jesus.html
http://home.iae.nl/users/lightnet/creator/jesusmyth.htm
http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/origins_of_christianity.htm


"Theology is a superstition - Humanity is a religion" - Robert G.
Ingersol


BTW, what does work if all religion is created man made fantasy?

Just dropping God is not the answer for inner peace as this forum is
proof positive of that. With the multitude of spiritually sick
individuals here we can see humans need something in their life to
guide them to peace...at least it is so within our modern society of
sick complexities Neil.

See my previous discussion of this topic of what does work:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0





Take care,


V (Male)

Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
AA#2
cactus
2007-12-21 06:11:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by V
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I don't think they do give the OT as much weight as the NT.
We can ask the question Would the 'ideal' of a perfect, all loving God
approve of the Hebrew and Christian God Yahweh?
No, the ideal of God would not approve of God if the old testament is
a true accounting of Yahweh. The evidence shows that the God of the
monotheists as written in the bible is a man made story, whether it is
the story of Jesus or the God Yahweh of the Hebrews.
I write this after being a Catholic for 50+ years. What caused my
change in heart about God? Was it God's refusal to answer a self
centered prayer...No. Was it all the evil in the world...No. My change
in heart with my belief in God came from 'real study' of the dogma and
the books claimed to be the written words of God with a desire to get
closer to God. But, the more I studied, the further from God my
studies took me. But this is only a by product of the study of truth,
for if the study leads to a certain direction one must follow it, if
one is truth based. And if one is not truth based one makes up fantasy
and excuses and lives a delusional life.
If we look at logical and philosophical arguments for God they add up
to zero as each one of these arguments can be argued for or against
God
Ontological Argument +
Ontological Argument (--)
Cosmological Argument +
Cosmological Argument (--)
Teleological Argument +
Teleological Argument (--)
-----------------------------------------
Total = ZERO
As such, we need to look deeper into what the various religions of the
monotheist say to find the truth. There are four books claiming to be
the word of God. they are the Old Testament, New Testament, Qur'an and
the Book of Mormon. (OT, NT, Q and BOM) All these books conflict, yet
all claim to be the perfect word of God? Why doesn't God make clear
which one of these books to follow so there is no misunderstanding?
After all, a mistake in direction yield everlasting torture in hell?
Since God wont answer, we will have to answer for God by asking some
questions to get at the truth that God was invented by man. In short
we will judge God by the ideals of God. Then we can see clearly these
words of God were not written by an all perfect and all loving, all
good God but were just written by men claiming to be God.
Some religious advocates say it is presumptuous of anyone to 'judge'
God. But, such persons also judge God when they say God is good? In
order to judge something good it must still be judged? From my
studies, I have judged God as a creation or fantasy of man's mind and
a God that would refuse to tell the direction for a person to take and
then take joy in torturing that person for a mistake that the person
could not avoid is definitely bad.
God was no always so silent with direction. If we go back to the OT we
can see God communicated extensively with the Hebrews. God directed
them specifically with how to design and build things and how to
worship him through burnt offerings and penance. God was very detailed
with his directions about unclean women during menses and how the
Hebrews should keep their slaves. All quotes courtesy of http://www.evilbible.com/
(BTW, they banned me from their forums...so much for freethinkers.)
"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that
the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the
slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the
slave is his own property." Exodus 21:20-21
God approving of slavery? God not approving of the Egyptians keeping
slaves yet is OK for the Hebrews to keep slaves? Again not a perfect
God. If we read further we will see God very bigoted and condemning of
all other nationalities except his chosen people the Hebrews. What
makes the world think such a bigoted God would accept them when God
had such hatred for others he supposedly created?
If we go to more modern times and the Christian dogma where God
offered his son to be tortured and killed in order for God to forgive
our sins? What do we do when we forgive another? Do we kill our son or
daughter or just forgive? How much more a perfect God could have just
forgiven us without killing his son? But God seemed to emphasize the
killing children in his words to his faithful as we can see in these
OT quotes.
"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the
city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy;
have no pity! Kill them all - old and young, girls and women and
little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your
task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy
leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards
with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the
city and did as they were told." Ezekiel 9:5-7
"The glory of Israel will fly away like a bird, for your children will
die at birth or perish in the womb or never even be conceived. Even
if your children do survive to grow up, I will take them from you. It
will be a terrible day when I turn away and leave you alone. I have
watched Israel become as beautiful and pleasant as Tyre. But now
Israel will bring out her children to be slaughtered." O LORD, what
should I request for your people? I will ask for wombs that don't
give birth and breasts that give no milk. The LORD says, "All their
wickedness began at Gilgal; there I began to hate them. I will drive
them from my land because of their evil actions. I will love them no
more because all their leaders are rebels. The people of Israel are
stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit.
And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children."
Hosea 9:11-16
"Suppose a man has a stubborn, rebellious son who will not obey his
father or mother, even though they discipline him. In such cases, the
father and mother must take the son before the leaders of the town.
They must declare: 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and
refuses to obey. He is a worthless drunkard.' Then all the men of the
town must stone him to death. In this way, you will cleanse this evil
from among you, and all Israel will hear about it and be afraid."
Deuteronomy 21:18-21
What happened to this vocal God that seemed to die with the authors
of the Old Testament, for no one ever hears a peep from God? Did God
die with the writers? BTW, if God was a perfect designer, should he
have not made women 'unclean' and not have menses and that way God
could have saved some breath and cut his 600+ commandants to the
Hebrew down by one? See: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~adamgosp/otcomm.htm
God even commanded the people how to bake bread, (with human
excrement) discriminate against the handicapped, kill the faithful of
other religions and how much money to pay to rape young women.
Each day prepare your bread as you would barley cakes. While all the
people are watching, bake it over a fire using dried human dung as
fuel and then eat the bread. For this is what the LORD says: "Israel
will eat defiled bread in the Gentile lands, where I will banish
them!" Then I said, "O Sovereign LORD, must I be defiled by using
human dung? For I have never been defiled before. From the time I was
a child until now I have never eaten any animal that died of sickness
or that I found dead. And I have never eaten any of the animals that
our laws forbid." "All right," the LORD said. "You may bake your
bread with cow dung instead of human dung." Ezekiel 4:12-15
"No one whose testicles have been crushed or whose penis has been cut
off may be admitted into the community of the Lord." Deuteronomy
23:2
"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not
engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he
must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never
be allowed to divorce her." Deuteronomy 22:28-29
"If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved
wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other
gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other
nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the
other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon
him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the
first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with
you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you
astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of
Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall
fear and never do such evil as this in your midst." Deuteronomy
13:7-12
Yes, the writers for God's word will be able to show you how the God
they claim to be perfect is not perfect and just an extension of
imperfect man's mind. If you read the bible with an open mind that is
logical and rational you will see this for yourself. It is only when
we make excuses for God that God is relieved from being a true God.
In the OT it says God is a 'jealous God' and requires worship.
"You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in
the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the
earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the
Lord, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their
father's wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the
third and fourth generation" Exodus 20:4-5
Once someone 'requires' anything outside themselves the persons peace
will be disturbed. Yet the popular belief that God is perfect...the
two (jealousy and perfection) don't go together. In addition such a
God would not pass the peace test. If the God did not receive worship
the God's peace would be disturbed from having demands and not getting
those demands fulfilled. Then the God would have its peace disturbed
even further by torturing the person for everlasting eternity since
that person did not provide the worship the God demanded. Does all
this smack of a perfect being, perfectly at peace or just man
impersonating God
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=133.0
You see, many people do with religion and their religious fixations
the same as the compulsive gambler does with their fantasy.
Excerpt From: Gamblers Anonymous pamphlet "The dream world of a
compulsive gambler." A lot of time is spent creating images of great
and wonderful things they are going to do as soon as they make "the
big win."... No one can convince them that their great schemes will
not come true. They believe they will, for without this dream world,
life for them would not be tolerable.
The truth is that which does not change. Man made religion is always
changing. This phenomena of putting a spin on truth goes back to the
earliest formations of the church when it was voted on by presumptuous
individuals as to how to describe God and the trinity. You see it was
all voted on and the proponent that had the 'best spin' on it got the
credit for Nicene Creed. But in reality no one has a clew about this
subject. Want a modern day example of such spiritual sickness, spin
and lies?
"Roman Catholic Church Considers Abolishing Limbo Theory" A commission
that met at the Vatican last week is expected to recommend to Pope
Benedict XVI that the teaching of limbo be dropped. The Roman Catholic
Church may abolish the concept of limbo - the place some Catholics
believe the spirit of babies go if they die before being baptized
Snip from: http://www.christianpost.com/article/20051209/22492.htm
But it is impossible to have a rational discussion with most religious
devotees when they insist on irrationality as their first line of
defense. We are rational beings, logical beings, yet belief in God can
only come about through irrational, non logical thought. Would a God
that created rational, logical beings require such beings to follow
irrational fantasy in order to believe in him? An example? While
discussing fossils and ancient coal with a Christian he claimed that
fossils and ancient coal are not really old and 'planted by the devil'
to trick people from believing in God? this also recalls the book of
Enoch, a book that was left out of the bible by the powers that
decided what went into it when it was first formed. This book
described many fantastic claims about how Eve was tricked by the devil
masquerading as an angel. Would God create such subterfuge as planted
fake fossils in order to trick his loved ones only to condom them to
burning and torture for all eternity in hell because they cannot find
out the rational and logical truth? Yes, such an unjust God would if
your God is that of a sickly, delusional, religious devotee that
believe is such fantasy.
Even when we discuss the story of Jesus, is it rational for God to
have to kill his only begotten son in order to forgive us? What do we
do when we forgive another? Do we kill our mother, son or daughter in
order to forgive another person? Yet, Christians cling to this
fantasy. Jesus was never born on December 25 and in fact there is no
evidence Jesus was ever born at all. Christians adopted Christmas from
the pagan December 25 holiday in order to promote their own agenda,
just as they did with Halloween.
http://www.vexen.co.uk/books/jesusmysteries.html
http://www.atheists.org/christianity/myth.html
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/fabrication.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_as_myth
http://home.ca.inter.net/~oblio/home.htm
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/7748/106446
http://www.abc.net.au/religion/stories/s1517078.htm
http://www.atheist-community.org/library/articles/read.php?id=700
http://www.christianorigins.com/goguel/
http://www.bede.org.uk/price1.htm
http://www.objectivethought.com/atheism/jesusmyth.html
http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/jesus.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/historicus/jesus.html
http://home.iae.nl/users/lightnet/creator/jesusmyth.htm
http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/origins_of_christianity.htm
"Theology is a superstition - Humanity is a religion" - Robert G.
Ingersol
BTW, what does work if all religion is created man made fantasy?
Just dropping God is not the answer for inner peace as this forum is
proof positive of that. With the multitude of spiritually sick
individuals here we can see humans need something in their life to
guide them to peace...at least it is so within our modern society of
sick complexities Neil.
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0
Take care,
V (Male)
Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
AA#2
No they don't. They consider the commandments to have been superseded by
the actions of Jesus of Nazareth.
l***@cs.com
2007-12-21 05:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I probably don't fit your idea of what a Christian might be.. but for
what it's worth the OT is not what Christianity is about anyway. The
OT - besides being more of a history - concerns itself with promising
a Messiah.

The New Testament delivered that Messiah.

Merry Christmas, comrade.
JessHC
2007-12-21 16:37:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I probably don't fit your idea of what a Christian might be.. but for
what it's worth the OT is not what Christianity is about anyway. The
OT - besides being more of a history - concerns itself with promising
a Messiah.
The New Testament delivered that Messiah.
Merry Christmas, comrade.
Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not
come to destroy, but to fulfil.
l***@cs.com
2007-12-21 16:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by JessHC
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I probably don't fit your idea of what a Christian might be.. but for
what it's worth the OT is not what Christianity is about anyway. The
OT - besides being more of a history - concerns itself with promising
a Messiah.
The New Testament delivered that Messiah.
Merry Christmas, comrade.
Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not
come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Sure.. just as I said; pre-Messiah.. and post-Messiah.. the big
difference.
OT adherents are still waiting.. NT believers are practicing.
Feng
2007-12-22 00:17:53 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:37:39 -0800 (PST), JessHC
Post by JessHC
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I probably don't fit your idea of what a Christian might be.. but for
what it's worth the OT is not what Christianity is about anyway. The
OT - besides being more of a history - concerns itself with promising
a Messiah.
The New Testament delivered that Messiah.
Merry Christmas, comrade.
Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not
come to destroy, but to fulfil.
That is what is called the skillful means. It doesn't matter whether
the law is destroyed or fulfilled. The fact remains that law is thrown
out. That is the real goal.
Ramona
2007-12-21 16:57:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I probably don't fit your idea of what a Christian might be.. but for
what it's worth the OT is not what Christianity is about anyway. The
OT - besides being more of a history - concerns itself with promising
a Messiah.
The New Testament delivered that Messiah.
How do you see that promise being fulfilled?
Genesis 49:1 This requires that Jesus FATHER be from the tribe of
Judah. When was the Father birthed into the family of Judah? Or do
you believe Joseph is Jesus BIOLOGICAL father....adoption doesn't
count.
Isaiah 11:12 Have all the Jews gathered in Israel? Nope, so Jesus
failed in this department as well.

You can go here for more information:
http://jewsforjudaism.com/jews-jesus/jews-jesus-index.html
If Jesus fails in any requirement, he fails as Messiah which he
clearly has done based on scripture.

Ramona
Post by l***@cs.com
Merry Christmas, comrade.
l***@cs.com
2007-12-21 19:01:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ramona
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I probably don't fit your idea of what a Christian might be.. but for
what it's worth the OT is not what Christianity is about anyway. The
OT - besides being more of a history - concerns itself with promising
a Messiah.
The New Testament delivered that Messiah.
How do you see that promise being fulfilled?
Genesis 49:1 This requires that Jesus FATHER be from the tribe of
Judah.  When was the Father birthed into the family of Judah?  Or do
you believe Joseph is Jesus BIOLOGICAL father....adoption doesn't
count.
Isaiah 11:12  Have all the Jews gathered in Israel?  Nope, so Jesus
failed in this department as well.
Oh lordee, help me...
I am no Pharasee sitting in shool to debate theology..
And I certainly have zippo claim to religious metaphysical insight..
We will all find out... bye and bye.

I just stated the obvious and very real fact:

"Sure.. just as I said; pre-Messiah.. and post-Messiah.. the big
difference. OT adherents are still waiting.. NT believers are
practicing."

PS: Your argument only has bearing with those believing verbatim in
the authority of the OT... but I was kind.
Christopher A.Lee
2007-12-21 19:07:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Ramona
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
I probably don't fit your idea of what a Christian might be.. but for
what it's worth the OT is not what Christianity is about anyway. The
OT - besides being more of a history - concerns itself with promising
a Messiah.
The New Testament delivered that Messiah.
How do you see that promise being fulfilled?
Genesis 49:1 This requires that Jesus FATHER be from the tribe of
Judah.  When was the Father birthed into the family of Judah?  Or do
you believe Joseph is Jesus BIOLOGICAL father....adoption doesn't
count.
Isaiah 11:12  Have all the Jews gathered in Israel?  Nope, so Jesus
failed in this department as well.
Oh lordee, help me...
I am no Pharasee sitting in shool to debate theology..
And I certainly have zippo claim to religious metaphysical insight..
We will all find out... bye and bye.
"Sure.. just as I said; pre-Messiah.. and post-Messiah.. the big
difference. OT adherents are still waiting.. NT believers are
practicing."
What "real fact", brainwashed moron who is too stupid to understand
the real world beyond his religion?
Uncle Vic
2007-12-21 05:19:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Most Christians are "Salad Bar" Christians. They pick out the chapters &
verses they like, and ignore the stuff they don't like. There's a lot of
stuff in the OT that is not to like. They say Jebus came to fulfil
(replace) the old law, yet they ignore the verse that says "not one jot nor
tittle shall be removed from the old law". They are essentially making up
their own religion.

Staunch Baptists get my respect, sort of. They are forced to believe every
fucking word of the bible, OT & NT. This makes for some very heavy denial
of modern science, biology, medicine... well, reality. And it puts a
doobie in the mouth, and rose-colored glasses upon the eyes of Christianity
for all to see. LOL!
Post by Simpson
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
You must be new to this.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
l***@cs.com
2007-12-21 05:33:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Most Christians are "Salad Bar" Christians.  They pick out the chapters &
verses they like, and ignore the stuff they don't like.  There's a lot of
stuff in the OT that is not to like.  They say Jebus came to fulfil
(replace) the old law, yet they ignore the verse that says "not one jot nor
tittle shall be removed from the old law".  They are essentially making up
their own religion.
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
Uncle Vic
2007-12-21 05:40:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@cs.com
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
Yeah... you're the one that believes in burning bushes that can speak,
talking snakes, people rising from the dead, and worse, an invisible sky
pixie who sacrificed himself to himself to save his own creation from his
own wrath, for doing what he created them to do in the first place. The
inadequacies here lie within the confines of that empty chamber attached to
your neck.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
What Me Worry?
2007-12-21 06:11:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Uncle Vic
Post by l***@cs.com
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
Yeah... you're the one that believes in burning bushes that can speak,
talking snakes, people rising from the dead, and worse, an invisible sky
pixie who sacrificed himself to himself to save his own creation from his
own wrath, for doing what he created them to do in the first place. The
inadequacies here lie within the confines of that empty chamber attached to
your neck.
Do you have a problem believing that omniscient, omnipotent beings exist to
create byzantine dogmatic rules by which its own creations (read:
playthings) will be brutally judged and then tortured for eternity if they
follow the instincts that sHe gave them? You don't think God should be a
twisted torturing psycho?
Uncle Vic
2007-12-21 06:34:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Uncle Vic
Post by l***@cs.com
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
Yeah... you're the one that believes in burning bushes that can
speak, talking snakes, people rising from the dead, and worse, an
invisible sky pixie who sacrificed himself to himself to save his own
creation from his own wrath, for doing what he created them to do in
the first place. The inadequacies here lie within the confines of
that empty chamber attached to
your neck.
Do you have a problem believing that omniscient, omnipotent beings
exist to create byzantine dogmatic rules by which its own creations
(read: playthings) will be brutally judged and then tortured for
eternity if they follow the instincts that sHe gave them? You don't
think God should be a twisted torturing psycho?
No, I actually *think*.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
Feng
2007-12-22 00:26:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Uncle Vic
Post by l***@cs.com
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
Yeah... you're the one that believes in burning bushes that can speak,
talking snakes, people rising from the dead, and worse, an invisible sky
pixie who sacrificed himself to himself to save his own creation from his
own wrath, for doing what he created them to do in the first place. The
inadequacies here lie within the confines of that empty chamber attached to
your neck.
Do you have a problem believing that omniscient, omnipotent beings exist to
playthings) will be brutally judged and then tortured for eternity if they
follow the instincts that sHe gave them? You don't think God should be a
twisted torturing psycho?
Pure deception of the Devil describing the psycho itself while
stealing the name of God.
Christopher A.Lee
2007-12-22 09:03:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Feng
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Uncle Vic
Post by l***@cs.com
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
Yeah... you're the one that believes in burning bushes that can speak,
talking snakes, people rising from the dead, and worse, an invisible sky
pixie who sacrificed himself to himself to save his own creation from his
own wrath, for doing what he created them to do in the first place. The
inadequacies here lie within the confines of that empty chamber attached to
your neck.
Do you have a problem believing that omniscient, omnipotent beings exist to
playthings) will be brutally judged and then tortured for eternity if they
follow the instincts that sHe gave them? You don't think God should be a
twisted torturing psycho?
Pure deception of the Devil describing the psycho itself while
stealing the name of God.
Idiot.
JessHC
2007-12-21 16:39:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Most Christians are "Salad Bar" Christians. �They pick out the chapters &
verses they like, and ignore the stuff they don't like. �There's a lot of
stuff in the OT that is not to like. �They say Jebus came to fulfil
(replace) the old law, yet they ignore the verse that says "not one jot nor
tittle shall be removed from the old law". �They are essentially making up
their own religion.
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
You need a deity to tell you what's right and wrong? How sad.
l***@cs.com
2007-12-21 17:15:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@cs.com
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Most Christians are "Salad Bar" Christians. �They pick out the chapters &
verses they like, and ignore the stuff they don't like. �There's a lot of
stuff in the OT that is not to like. �They say Jebus came to fulfil
(replace) the old law, yet they ignore the verse that says "not one jot nor
tittle shall be removed from the old law". �They are essentially making up
their own religion.
Yeah.. just as most atheists are fruit bar simps nit-picking at
religion due to their own inadequacies in dealing with concepts of
right and wrong.
You need a deity to tell you what's right and wrong?  How sad.
No, I don't need a deity to tell me what was right or wrong.. I had my
parents and family teach me.. just as they had their parents to teach
them.. etc. They all lived in a Christian society.

What makes you think you need to talk to a deity in order to be imbued
with righteousness, anyway?

All you need is to live in the right sort of society that would convey
righteous behavior to those folks who haven't had the advantage of
good parents. Christian societal mores have proven themselves to be
successful - while anti-Christian societal values have not. If a
choice has to be made, stick with a winner.
skyeyes
2007-12-21 17:05:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Why is this posted to alt.atheism?

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Free Lunch
2007-12-21 17:25:55 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:05:14 -0800 (PST), in alt.atheism
Post by skyeyes
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Why is this posted to alt.atheism?
Because there's a small group of so-called Christians who are incapable
of behaving like civilized human beings. It's as if they want to mock
the Christianity that they claim to adhere to.
duke
2007-12-22 13:27:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:05:14 -0800 (PST), in alt.atheism
Post by skyeyes
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Why is this posted to alt.atheism?
Because there's a small group of so-called Christians who are incapable
of behaving like civilized human beings. It's as if they want to mock
the Christianity that they claim to adhere to.
You need the help.

duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
walksalone
2007-12-21 20:12:54 UTC
Permalink
skyeyes <***@dakotacom.net> news:046c74f0-2564-4fc4-923a-
***@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com @ ***@dakotacom.net & follow
ups set to alt.atheism
Post by skyeyes
Post by Simpson
Do Christians accept the teachings of the Old Testament?
Do Christians give the Old Testament every bit as much weight as the New
Testament?
Is there a variety of opinions amongst Christians regarding this issue?
Why is this posted to alt.atheism?
Because someone wants to start the shit?

But in the xian newsgroups, the question is valid.

Don't blame me, you just had to ask.

walksalone who is going back to sleep now.
H***@webtv.net
2007-12-22 04:56:08 UTC
Permalink
That is a very good question to ask!
Those in Sabbath day churches I believe they do as many of them also
believe in not eating unclean meats as I do.
have7
Simpson
2007-12-22 15:16:16 UTC
Permalink
Wisdom from an apple...perhaps we should supply more apples to
Republicans.
I believe that was 'knowledge'.

Wisdom comes from bananas.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...