Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 81 to 120 of 145

Thread: Heaven, Hell and Purgatory

  1. #81
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    A being that knows it is able to prevent evil but does not do so must be evil itself. According to Christian dogma, they follow such a being. There is nothing good about it.

    It sounds to me that "God", if it exists, is no more loving than I am - and may indeed be less so. "God is love" is a three word phrase, but when the theologians get involved, it seems that phrase becomes a lot more nuanced and convoluted.
    In regards to evil,

    As Christians we believe that disaster, sickness, even accidents, were never part of God’s original creation. The created world of Genesis 1 was perfect and included man’s ability to exercise free will. But all this became subject to degeneration once rebellion and corruption entered the world. By Genesis 4 there has already been a murder and the world is in trauma.

    In addition, suffering has no part in God’s final creation. At the crucifixion God defeated evil, suffering, even death itself, and began a new age open to anyone: At the fulfilment of this age “there will be no more death, or mourning, or crying, or pain” (Revelation 21:4). Right now, however, we live between the ages, between Genesis and Revelation, in a disfigured world, which is not as it should be. But we are not left to face it alone. God will not leave us alone…

    In regards to being a loving God,

    Christianity is the only faith that has at its core the suffering and death of its own God. We sometimes imagine God to be distant and disconnected, and if only he would wave his magic wand to make the bad things go away. But it’s not like that. God is neither distant, nor unconcerned about suffering. On the contrary, God accompanies us and even has an intense, personal knowledge of suffering and loss. In our struggles it can help us to know that God has been there before us.



    Jesus did not tell me anything. I don't know who this bloke is that you keep referring to. He should make his own case.

    "He who orders his slave to do things that he knows him to be incapable of doing, then punishes him, is a fool" ~ Abu Isa al-Warraq
    You are totally capable.
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 11-01-2020 at 05:20 PM.

  2. #82
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    The phrase "Savior of all people" is unique in the Bible to this verse. It clearly does not mean every person is saved in the sense that every person goes to heaven. Scripture often presents the need for people to be "saved" in order to have eternal life, rather than eternal destruction (see John 3:16–18; 2 Thessalonians 1:9 for context).
    Incorrect - 1 Corinthians 15:22 says that "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

    Also, 1 John 2:2 says that "He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    You are presented with facts, evidence, counter-arguments, scripture, the core beliefs etc from various sources. It's your choice in deciding what u want to do with that.
    The New Testament is not primary evidence that a historical Jesus existed, nevermind a supernatural one. It's a hagiography.

    Where's the body?

    What year has Jesus born in? This should be easy for you, as his birth was supposedly prophesied.

    What year did he die in? This should be easy for you, as his alleged death and resurrection are the most important aspect of the Christian myth.

    Where's Osiris body?

    What year was he born in?

    What year did he die and ressurect in?

  3. #83
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Incorrect - 1 Corinthians 15:22 says that "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

    Also, 1 John 2:2 says that "He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world."
    No, I am very much correct.

    Again, "all made alive" and things like "sins of the world" is referring to the fact that everyone CAN be saved, not that all will. What's the point of hell if everyone is already saved? You need to put verses into context within whole scripture.

    Ask any other credible seminarian/scholar who is familiar with correct biblical doctrine. What you are stating is incorrect and a heresy

    The New Testament is not primary evidence that a historical Jesus existed, nevermind a supernatural one. It's a hagiography.
    I believe we've had this conversation before in the "Jesus as a historical figure" thread.

    Where's the body?

    What year has Jesus born in? This should be easy for you, as his birth was supposedly prophesied.

    What year did he die in? This should be easy for you, as his alleged death and resurrection are the most important aspect of the Christian myth.

    Where's Osiris body?

    What year was he born in?

    What year did he die and ressurect in?
    Nobody really knows exactly when Jesus was born. Some scholars think that he was born between 6 B.C. and 4 B.C., and since we don't know his exact birthday we can't tell when his exact death/resurrection was either.

    And if you were honest, after researching the Osiris thing yourself you'd figure out the comparative mythology thing was false

    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Regardless of whether I answer your questions or not, I'm not sure It'd make a big difference since you've already made the choice in your mind not to believe
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 11-01-2020 at 05:46 PM.

  4. #84
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    In regards to evil,

    As Christians we believe that disaster, sickness, even accidents, were never part of God’s original creation. The created world of Genesis 1 was perfect and included man’s ability to exercise free will. But all this became subject to degeneration once rebellion and corruption entered the world. By Genesis 4 there has already been a murder and the world is in trauma.

    In addition, suffering has no part in God’s final creation. At the crucifixion God defeated evil, suffering, even death itself, and began a new age open to anyone: At the fulfilment of this age “there will be no more death, or mourning, or crying, or pain” (Revelation 21:4). Right now, however, we live between the ages, between Genesis and Revelation, in a disfigured world, which is not as it should be. But we are not left to face it alone. God will not leave us alone…
    What you wrote here is pure superstition. It has no more substance than the god you worship. An omnipotent being punishing the innocent is evil in my view - the Christian god does this. Punishing people after restitution has already been carried out is evil. As is having a punishment that is severely disproportionate than the crime itself - there is no justice in this. Such a being is not even merciful, nevermind loving.

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    In regards to being a loving God,

    Christianity is the only faith that has at its core the suffering and death of its own God.
    Incorrect, many theologies have deities that suffered (for example Prometheus in Greek theology) and/or were killed (e.g. Osiris in Egyptian mythology): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying-and-rising_deity

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    [We sometimes imagine God to be distant and disconnected, and if only he would wave his magic wand to make the bad things go away. But it’s not like that. God is neither distant, nor unconcerned about suffering. On the contrary, God accompanies us and even has an intense, personal knowledge of suffering and loss. In our struggles it can help us to know that God has been there before us.
    Well, you seem to be unable to give an unique property of "God" that is observable, so I can more than imagine "God" to be distant and disconnected. It's as though he doesn't exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    You are totally capable.
    Only a few hours ago, you told me that none of us are perfect and we are to be tortured for being created that way unless we accept the punishment of an innocent individual.

  5. #85
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    An omnipotent being punishing the innocent is evil in my view - the Christian god does this. Punishing people after restitution has already been carried out is evil. As is having a punishment that is severely disproportionate than the crime itself - there is no justice in this. Such a being is not even merciful, nevermind loving.
    The problem is that you're conflating "punishing people" with allowing evil to happen.

    Only a few hours ago, you told me that none of us are perfect and we are to be tortured for being created that way unless we accept the punishment of an innocent individual.
    come on man, (you know) you are spinning/conflating things - that's not what I said

    Incorrect, many theologies have deities that suffered (for example Prometheus in Greek theology) and/or were killed (e.g. Osiris in Egyptian mythology): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying-and-rising_deity
    Osiris was murdered and his body was then dismembered and scattered. Later, his body pieces were recovered and rejoined, and he was rejuvenated. Osiris then journeyed to the underworld, where he became the lord of the dead. He did not resurrect with a glorified body and walk with men on earth, as did Jesus. He was not alive again, as was Jesus, but was instead a “dead” god who never returned among the living

    Well, you seem to be unable to give an unique property of "God" that is observable, so I can more than imagine "God" to be distant and disconnected. It's as though he doesn't exist
    You are totally capable

  6. #86
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    No, I am very much correct.

    Again, "all made alive" and things like "sins of the world" is referring to the fact that everyone CAN be saved, not that all will. What's the point of hell if everyone is already saved? You need to put verses into context within whole scripture.

    Ask any other credible seminarian/scholar who is familiar with correct biblical doctrine. What you are stating is incorrect and a heresy
    It says that all sins have already been propitiated. When a debt is paid off by a third party, this is not dependent on the debtor accepting it. Only the creditor.

    Many significant Christian sects believe that everybody goes to Heaven eventually, and many believe that Hell doesn't even exist. I've already explained you to that Hell as a place where people are tortured for eternity is a doctrine adopted by some Christians that may not even be present in the New Testament text. It is certainly contrary to historic Jewish dogma:

    Hell may merely be the place of the dead.
    https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1416390

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    I believe we've had this conversation before in the "Jesus as a historical figure" thread.

    Nobody really knows exactly when Jesus was born. Some scholars think that he was born between 6 B.C. and 4 B.C., and since we don't know his exact birthday we can't tell when his exact death/resurrection was either.

    And if you were honest, after researching the Osiris thing yourself you'd figure out the comparative mythology stuff was all false

    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Regardless of whether I answer your questions or not, I'm not sure It'd make a big difference since you've already made the choice in your mind not to believe
    The point is, Jesus birth and death dates are vague - exactly reminiscent of a myth, e.g. Osiris.

    The birth years you gave are based on things like significant astronomical events, as well as a census that never happened, which the authors of the hagiographies about Jesus required to add to Jesus' mystique. The authors make irreconcilable errors about historical facts (e.g. getting the Emperor's name wrong or otherwise being inconsistent). So Christians have absolute no clue whatsoever.

    The New Testament I believe makes one reference to his age in later life, where a Pharisee says "You are not yet fifty" which would imply Jesus was in his late 40s.

    On the day of Jesus' death, there was a solar eclipse for three hours (an impossible event) which darkened the land (or the whole Earth depending on the translation). Jesus is said to have died at Passover, which only happens at a Full Moon. But a solar eclipse only happens at a New Moon. So we know the author/s did not even witness Jesus' death - most likely, they wanted Jesus to die at Passover to fit the narrative of him being a sacrificial lamb.

    Christians have NO CLUE whatsoever what year he was born in, what year he died in...nevermind what day.

    The Temple curtain in Jerusalem is said to have torn in two when Jesus died, with dead Christians being resurrected from the graves, and earthquakes to boot. But this is recorded in no contemporary Jewish or Roman account.

  7. #87
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    The problem is that you're conflating "punishing people" with allowing evil to happen.
    I didn't even say that. I said "A being that knows it is able to prevent evil but does not do so must be evil itself." - ANY evil.

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Lol come on man, (you know) you are spinning/conflating things.
    No. The central dogma of mainstream Christianity is based on the punishment of someone who was innocent. That is an absolutely upside down moral system. No matter which way you spin it, that is unjust.

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Osiris was murdered and his body was then dismembered and scattered. Later, his body pieces were recovered and rejoined, and he was rejuvenated. Osiris then journeyed to the underworld, where he became the lord of the dead. He did not resurrect with a glorified body and walk with men on earth, as did Jesus. He was not alive again, as was Jesus, but was instead a “dead” god who never returned among the living
    You are moving the goalposts. You told me that "In regards to being a loving God,

    Christianity is the only faith that has at its core the suffering and death of its own God."

    ...but I've shown you that other gods DID suffer in their myths. That Osiris is not among the living - your implication is that he is suffering more than Jesus? But you're trying to make out Jesus is better? Your implication is also that Jesus has returned amongst the living. Okay, again, if you cannot produce Osiris' body, where is Jesus' body?

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    You are totally capable
    Totally capable in what sense?

  8. #88
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Osiris was murdered and his body was then dismembered and scattered. Later, his body pieces were recovered and rejoined, and he was rejuvenated. Osiris then journeyed to the underworld, where he became the lord of the dead. He did not resurrect with a glorified body and walk with men on earth, as did Jesus. He was not alive again, as was Jesus, but was instead a “dead” god who never returned among the living
    What about Heracles?

  9. #89
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    It says that all sins have already been propitiated. When a debt is paid off by a third party, this is not dependent on the debtor accepting it. Only the creditor.

    Many significant Christian sects believe that everybody goes to Heaven eventually, and many believe that Hell doesn't even exist.
    Lol. Maybe for the cultish sects. I actually go to church so I'm up to date on the mainstream beliefs. What you said isn't something familiar to most Christians.

    The point is, Jesus birth and death dates are vague - exactly reminiscent of a myth, e.g. Osiris.
    The difference between the New Testament and myths / folk tales is that the narratives about Jesus focus on a real person and were composed shortly after his death on the basis of eyewitness evidence. Myths / Folk tales are about fictional beings without known origins.

    The birth years you gave are based on things like significant astronomical events, as well as a census that never happened, which the authors of the hagiographies about Jesus required to add to Jesus' mystique. The authors make irreconcilable errors about historical facts (e.g. getting the Emperor's name wrong or otherwise being inconsistent). So Christians have absolute no clue whatsoever.
    Most (credible) historians believed Jesus existed. There is also nothing in history (archaelogical evidence, etc) that contradicts a single thing in the bible. In regards to authors making errors - they are human!!! If Matthew Mark Luke and John had 100%-ness between them, people should be more suspicious.



    The Temple curtain in Jerusalem is said to have torn in two when Jesus died, with dead Christians being resurrected from the graves, and earthquakes to boot. But this is recorded in no contemporary Jewish or Roman account.
    In the case of the veil of the temple being ripped from the top to the bottom there are three witnesses to the fact. They are competent witnesses as their published writing demonstrates : intelligent men capable of presenting data in exceptional clarity and reporting matters in highly structured form.

    Matthew 27:51
    And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

    Mark 15:38
    And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

    Luke 23:46
    And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

    These are the facts of the case.

    This is the three fold evidence and testimony.

    And these are the very men who have 'turned the world upside down', Acts 17:6, whose words reverberate around the world to this very day.

    One would not expect the Romans to document this fact since they were not permitted access to the inner precincts of the temple. Only priests could enter that part of the temple.

    And one would not anticipate reliable testimony from the Jews (of the period) when one looks at the behaviour of the hierarchy - lying in order to murder Jesus of Nazareth, bribery in recruiting Judas to betray Jesus of Nazareth and coercion in forcing Pilate's hand to execute Jesus of Nazareth by Roman authority.

  10. #90
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    What about Heracles?
    Or Romulus? Or Zalmoxis? As mentioned by Richard Carrier in this pdf document (direct link): https://www.richardcarrier.info/Hist...y_of_Jesus.pdf

    Dying-and-Rising Gods

    Romulus: Roman state god, his death and resurrection celebrated in annual plays.

    Osiris: Egyptian god, those baptized into his death and resurrection are saved in the afterlife.

    Zalmoxis: Thracian god, his death and resurrection assures followers of eternal life.

  11. #91
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Lol. Maybe for the cultish sects. I actually go to church so I'm up to date on the mainstream beliefs. What you said isn't something familiar to most Christians.
    Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity weren't even the oldest Christian cult. The "Christians" originally considered themselves to follow The Way, but the "Christianity" that survived persecuted other sects and killed them out (for example, sects led by those associated with "James, brother of Jesus" , and John the Baptist (he may even have actually existed.

    The truth is, Christianity is a splinter sect of Judaism, which mostly does not accept "Hell" as an eternal punishment, much as they always have done. "Hell" (as merely the ream of the dead) was inspired by Greek thought, while the punishment angle coming from ancient Zoroastrian beliefs regarding the everlasting flame.

  12. #92
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Or Romulus? Or Zalmoxis? As mentioned by Richard Carrier in this pdf document (direct link): https://www.richardcarrier.info/Hist...y_of_Jesus.pdf
    Richard Carrier stinks

  13. #93
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Most (credible) historians believed Jesus existed. There is also nothing in history (archaelogical evidence, etc) that contradicts a single thing in the bible. In regards to authors making errors - they are human!!! If Matthew Mark Luke and John had 100%-ness between them, people should be more suspicious.
    You make your own straightjacket.

    There are many things that contradicts things in the bible, in terms of science, history, logical contradiction etc.

    For example, some of the errors that the authors of the New Testament made (we mostly don't know their names - they were later additions generally) include alleged prophecies made in the Old Testament about the Messiah. They made numerous errors that come from misunderstanding what they were reading.

    For example, they seemingly thought that Isaiah 11:1 said that the Messiah would come from the settlement Nazareth, but it only actually says he would come from the branch of Jesse (father of David) - the word for branch being "netzer".

    There isn't even any convincing evidence that Nazareth was a settlement in the time of Jesus, nevermind a major one of some fame ("Nothing good can come from there")>


    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    In the case of the veil of the temple being ripped from the top to the bottom there are three witnesses to the fact. They are competent witnesses as their published writing demonstrates : intelligent men capable of presenting data in exceptional clarity and reporting matters in highly structured form.

    Matthew 27:51
    And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

    Mark 15:38
    And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

    Luke 23:46
    And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

    These are the facts of the case.

    This is the three fold evidence and testimony.

    And these are the very men who have 'turned the world upside down', Acts 17:6, whose words reverberate around the world to this very day.

    One would not expect the Romans to document this fact since they were not permitted access to the inner precincts of the temple. Only priests could enter that part of the temple.

    And one would not anticipate reliable testimony from the Jews (of the period) when one looks at the behaviour of the hierarchy - lying in order to murder Jesus of Nazareth, bribery in recruiting Judas to betray Jesus of Nazareth and coercion in forcing Pilate's hand to execute Jesus of Nazareth by Roman authority.
    A claim cannot use its own document as proof. The New Testament is a hagiography. Next you'll be saying that "snapewives" are rational for using the Harry Potter books as proof of Severus Snape. Yes, such people exist who really believe that Snape exists/existed.

    The New Testament records Jesus talking to "Satan" in the wilderness and to "God" in the garden of Gethsemane: even though they did not witness this, the gospel writers act as though they did. It is recorded that the disciples were asleep during Jesus' prayer in the garden, and was arrested soon after his return.

    In the Old Testament, it is recorded that the Sun stood still for a day in the sky so that Joshua could commit genocide more effectively. You may say that many people observe it. I know for a fact this did not happen, as this would have destroyed the Solar System. Similarly, a three hour eclipse of the Sun did not happen on the day Jesus allegedly died.

    If this had happened, this would have more than of "turned the world upside down" - it would have thrown it out of the Solar System.

  14. #94
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Richard Carrier stinks
    So based on your logic, there is nothing you can say to refute him.

  15. #95
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

  16. #96
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Most (credible) historians believed Jesus existed. There is also nothing in history (archaelogical evidence, etc) that contradicts a single thing in the bible. In regards to authors making errors - they are human!!! If Matthew Mark Luke and John had 100%-ness between them, people should be more suspicious.
    The HISTORICAL Jesus or the SUPERNATURAL Jesus? It is the supernatural claims we are talking about - his allegedly prophesied birth and death and resurrection, and the supernatural events associated with them.

    MOST historians are specialists in one area, and a generalist would not help your case. You are just making figures out of the air. MOST historians (however defined) related to early Christianity will be Christians too, so there impartiality would be quesionable.

  17. #97
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    And these are the very men who have 'turned the world upside down', Acts 17:6, whose words reverberate around the world to this very day.
    You’ve confirmed what I said - the New Testament is a hagiography, and thus cannot be regarded as an impartial history.

  18. #98
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    One would not expect the Romans to document this fact since they were not permitted access to the inner precincts of the temple. Only priests could enter that part of the temple.
    The Romans did not abide by such rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    And one would not anticipate reliable testimony from the Jews (of the period) when one looks at the behaviour of the hierarchy - lying in order to murder Jesus of Nazareth, bribery in recruiting Judas to betray Jesus of Nazareth and coercion in forcing Pilate's hand to execute Jesus of Nazareth by Roman authority.
    You said that only priests could have observed the torn curtain and yet it was recorded in the New Testament...

    You are engaging in a long history of libel against the Jews.

    The historical accounts of the period show that Pontius Pilate was a ruthless bastard, and not someone prone to dithering about killing some non-Roman. He was more of an ask questions later kind of guy. The authors of the New Testament did not do their research when they made their fiction.

  19. #99
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    So based on your logic, there is nothing you can say to refute him.
    No, I refuse to waste time on him, he's not a credible historian but an angry atheist from rationalwiki

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    You’ve confirmed what I said - the New Testament is a hagiography, and thus cannot be regarded as an impartial history.
    Accept the NT is a reliable account of history lol

    In evaluating the historical reliability of the Gospels, scholars consider authorship and date of composition, intention and genre, gospel sources and oral tradition, textual criticism, and historical authenticity of specific sayings and narrative events.

    The NT passes with flying colors, sorry

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    The HISTORICAL Jesus or the SUPERNATURAL Jesus? It is the supernatural claims we are talking about - his allegedly prophesied birth and death and resurrection, and the supernatural events associated with them.
    All his claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    A claim cannot use its own document as proof. The New Testament is a hagiography. Next you'll be saying that "snapewives" are rational for using the Harry Potter books as proof of Severus Snape. Yes, such people exist who really believe that Snape exists/existed.

    The New Testament records Jesus talking to "Satan" in the wilderness and to "God" in the garden of Gethsemane: even though they did not witness this, the gospel writers act as though they did. It is recorded that the disciples were asleep during Jesus' prayer in the garden, and was arrested soon after his return.
    The simplest explanation is that Jesus told his disciples afterwards

    In the Old Testament, it is recorded that the Sun stood still for a day in the sky so that Joshua could commit genocide more effectively. You may say that many people observe it. I know for a fact this did not happen, as this would have destroyed the Solar System. Similarly, a three hour eclipse of the Sun did not happen on the day Jesus allegedly died.

    If this had happened, this would have more than of "turned the world upside down" - it would have thrown it out of the Solar System.
    God also created the universe out of nothing. What isn't impossible after that
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 11-01-2020 at 08:01 PM.

  20. #100
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    There are many things that contradicts things in the bible, in terms of science, history, logical contradiction etc.

    For example, some of the errors that the authors of the New Testament made (we mostly don't know their names - they were later additions generally) include alleged prophecies made in the Old Testament about the Messiah. They made numerous errors that come from misunderstanding what they were reading.

    For example, they seemingly thought that Isaiah 11:1 said that the Messiah would come from the settlement Nazareth, but it only actually says he would come from the branch of Jesse (father of David) - the word for branch being "netzer".
    The town Natzeret is the word netzer plus the feminine ending, designated by the letter Tav. Hence, the special reason for the use of netzer becomes a play on words. He is to be a Branch and also would live in the town Natzeret. He is a netzer from Natzeret. Branches are produced by roots. Hence, the word branch might imply that the Messiah is lesser than the root. Upon further examination of the netzer prophecy it becomes clear that Messiah is also the root: In that day there shall be a root of Jesse who shall stand for an ensign to the peoples.

  21. #101
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Or Romulus? Or Zalmoxis? As mentioned by Richard Carrier in this pdf document (direct link): https://www.richardcarrier.info/Hist...y_of_Jesus.pdf
    Skeptics highlight similarities between Jesus and Horus, Mithras, Osiris or other ancient examples of “dying and rising” saviors. https://coldcasechristianity.com/wri...esemble-jesus/

    Consider the following reasonable conclusions one might draw when thinking about the possible existence of God:

    A Creator God would be incredibly strong and likely emerge in our world in a way that defies the natural order of things.

    A Creator God would have the power to perform miracles and control the forces of the natural environment.

    A Creator God, if He wanted us to know Him, would likely provide us with some form of mediator.

    A Creator God, if He was to come to earth, would certainly draw attention to Himself, gathering disciples.

    A Creator God would be powerful enough to defeat death.

    A Creator God would want to save his children and come to their rescue, particularly if they are facing an eternal threat.

    A Creator God, if He loves us, would likely make it possible for us to join Him in his eternal life.

    A Creator God would likely have infinite wisdom and be the master of our lives.
    All of these expectations are reasonable. If there is a God, we could sensibly expect him to possess these characteristics. So it really shouldn’t surprise us when we find ancient mythological descriptions of pre-Christian gods who emerge into the natural world in some unnatural way, perform miraculous deeds, intervene as mediators, gather disciples, defeat death, rescue believers, provide a path to eternal life and serve as the source of all wisdom.

    Claims of similarities are extremely exaggerated and based on the selective promotion of the common expectations of cultures contemplating the nature of God. The ancient Jewish audience of the Gospel authors would never have accepted such claims, and the reliable nature of the Gospels can be established beyond reasonable doubt.
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 11-01-2020 at 08:23 PM.

  22. #102
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    The simplest explanation is that Jesus told his disciples afterwards
    Except we are told that Jesus was arrested immediately after:
    The Prayer in the Garden

    32 Then they came to a place which was named Gethsemane; and He said to His disciples, “Sit here while I pray.” 33 And He took Peter, James, and John with Him, and He began to be troubled and deeply distressed. 34 Then He said to them, “My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death. Stay here and watch.”

    35 He went a little farther, and fell on the ground, and prayed that if it were possible, the hour might pass from Him. 36 And He said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for You. Take this cup away from Me; nevertheless, not what I will, but what You will.”

    37 Then He came and found them sleeping, and said to Peter, “Simon, are you sleeping? Could you not watch one hour? 38 Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

    39 Again He went away and prayed, and spoke the same words. 40 And when He returned, He found them asleep again, for their eyes were heavy; and they did not know what to answer Him.

    41 Then He came the third time and said to them, “Are you still sleeping and resting? It is enough! The hour has come; behold, the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners. 42 Rise, let us be going. See, My betrayer is at hand.”
    Betrayal and Arrest in Gethsemane

    43 And immediately, while He was still speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, with a great multitude with swords and clubs, came from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders. 44 Now His betrayer had given them a signal, saying, “Whomever I kiss, He is the One; seize Him and lead Him away safely.”

    45 As soon as he had come, immediately he went up to Him and said to Him, “Rabbi, Rabbi!” and kissed Him.

    46 Then they laid their hands on Him and took Him. 47 And one of those who stood by drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear.

    48 Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs to take Me? 49 I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and you did not seize Me. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled.”

    50 Then they all forsook Him and fled.
    - Mark 14:32-50

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    God also created the universe out of nothing. What isn't impossible after that
    “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”― Voltaire

    When you are capable of believing anything, there is nothing to distinguish one truth claim from another for you. When you are capable of believing such things, you are capable of doing terrible things because you have already given up your ability to reason.

  23. #103
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    The town Natzeret is the word netzer plus the feminine ending, designated by the letter Tav. Hence, the special reason for the use of netzer becomes a play on words. He is to be a Branch and also would live in the town Natzeret. He is a netzer from Natzeret. Branches are produced by roots. Hence, the word branch might imply that the Messiah is lesser than the root. Upon further examination of the netzer prophecy it becomes clear that Messiah is also the root: In that day there shall be a root of Jesse who shall stand for an ensign to the peoples.
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eviden...p_to_Bethlehem

    The issue of Nazareth's existence in the 1st century is one of the most common Reductive-Triumphalist fallacies out there. The logic (if one can even dignify it as such) is that if Nazareth existed then so did Jesus and if it didn't exist neither did Jesus (unless, of course, it was found that Nazareth didn't exist, in which case it wouldn't count as evidence against him).

    While it is true there are arguments regarding the existence of Nazareth in the 1st century, its existence (or nonexistence) wouldn't prove (or disprove) the existence of Jesus.[160] The existence of Nazareth no more proves Jesus existed than the existence of Atlanta, Georgia during the United States Civil War proves that Rhett Butler and Scarlett O'Hara were real people.

    Conversely, the non-existence of Nazareth doesn't prove Jesus didn't exist because as Carrier points out in On the Historicity of Jesus, "Christians neither came from nor were based in Nazareth. So the word clearly meant something else."[161] In fact, the original term for Christians (Nazorian) has nothing to do with Nazareth as the words have totally different origins. Epiphanius points out in that in Panarion 29 "the Nazarene[note 8] sect was before Christ and did not know Christ."

    It should be noted that some translations of Micah 5:2 make it clear that "Bethlehem" is a reference to a group of people in Judea, not a town as is claimed by apologists. Since a Bethlehem tribe could have settled anywhere...even far outside Judea, the whole town idea is on shaky ground.

    The curious fact that in the time Jesus supposedly lived there were two Bethlehems...is often ignored. They were the Bethlehem of Zebulun (around 10 kilometers northwest of Nazareth and 30 kilometers east of Haifa, i.e. in Galilee) and Bethlehem of Judea (8 kilometers south of Jerusalem). Aviram Oshri's "Where was Jesus Born?" in Volume 58 Number 6, November/December 2005 of Archaeology goes into the idea of Jesus being born in Bethlehem of Zebulun.

    Finally, there are some, such as Jerome (c. 347 – 420) and Eusebius , that argue that "Nazareth" doesn't even refer to a town at all but comes from the term Ne·tzer meaning "branch", "flower", or "offshoot" and rather refers to a group Jesus belonged to. The was indeed a sect called the Nazarenes in 1st century Judea but it is unclear if they predated the appearance of Jesus or were the result of his preaching.

    In any case, the existence of Nazareth argument is in regards to the Gospel Jesus rather than a hypothetical flesh-and-blood Jesus and is therefore pointless and in the end worthless.
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jesus#...views_of_Jesus

    The Jewish People regard Jesus of Nazareth as a false Messiah, since he did not fulfill any of the messianic prophecies.

    According to Judaism the true Messiah must:

    Be an observant Jewish man descended from the house of King David
    Be an ordinary human being (as opposed to the biological Son of God)
    Bring peace to the world
    Gather all Jews back into Israel
    Rebuild the ancient Temple in Jerusalem
    Unite humanity in the worship of יהוה‎ (Adonai) and Torah observance[22]

    Further Jews interpret the Old Testament as saying that יהוה‎ (Yahweh) gave a complete Tanakh and everlasting covenant while Christians claim that Jesus gave a new covenant. The two views are incompatible.[23] Jews interpret the First Commandment that having Jesus as well as the father is idolatry. Jews interpret Numbers 23:19 as indicating that God is neither a man nor a mortal.[24] Messianic Judaism has tried to reconcile this

  24. #104
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Skeptics highlight similarities between Jesus and Horus, Mithras, Osiris or other ancient examples of “dying and rising” saviors. https://coldcasechristianity.com/wri...esemble-jesus/

    Consider the following reasonable conclusions one might draw when thinking about the possible existence of God:



    All of these expectations are reasonable. If there is a God, we could sensibly expect him to possess these characteristics. So it really shouldn’t surprise us when we find ancient mythological descriptions of pre-Christian gods who emerge into the natural world in some unnatural way, perform miraculous deeds, intervene as mediators, gather disciples, defeat death, rescue believers, provide a path to eternal life and serve as the source of all wisdom.

    Claims of similarities are extremely exaggerated and based on the selective promotion of the common expectations of cultures contemplating the nature of God. The ancient Jewish audience of the Gospel authors would never have accepted such claims, and the reliable nature of the Gospels can be established beyond reasonable doubt.
    You must start with observations first, not conclusions...your error comes from your blind faith.

  25. #105
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cargo_cult#John_Frum

    Cargo Cult

    A cargo cult is a religious movement usually emerging in tribal or isolated societies after they have had an encounter with an external and technologically advanced society. Usually cargo cults focus on magical thinking and a variety of intricate rituals designed to obtain the material wealth of the advanced culture they encountered.

    The term "cargo cult" has caught the imagination of the public and is now used to describe a wide variety of phenomena that involve imitating external properties without the substance. In commerce, for example, successful products often result in "copycat" products that imitate the form but are usually of inferior quality.

    Cargo cults exemplify the third law of Arthur C. Clarke: that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

    History

    The earliest known cargo cult was the Tuka Movement in Fiji from 1885.[2]

    During World War II, the Allies set up many temporary military bases in the Pacific, introducing isolated peoples to Western manufactured goods, or "cargo". While military personnel were stationed there, many islanders noticed these newcomers engaging in ritualized behaviors, like marching around with rifles on their shoulders in formations.

    After the Allies left, the source of cargo was removed and the people were nearly as isolated as before. In their desire to keep getting more goods, various peoples throughout the Pacific introduced new religious rituals mimicking what they had seen the strangers do.

    Melanesia

    In one instance well-studied by anthropologists, the Tanna Islanders of what is now Vanuatu interpreted the US military drill as religious rituals, leading them to conclude that these behaviors brought cargo to the islands. Hoping that the cargo would return by duplicating these behaviors, they continued to maintain airstrips and replaced their facilities using native materials. These included remarkably detailed full-size replicas of airplanes made of wood, bark, and vines, a hut-like radio shack complete with headphones made of coconut halves, and attempts at recreating military uniforms and flags.[1]

    Many Melanesians believed that Western manufactured goods were created by ancestral spirits, but the occupiers had unfairly gained control of them (as the occupiers in question had no visible means of producing said goods themselves). The islanders expected that a messianic Western figure, John Frum, would return to deliver the cargo. No one knows who Frum is, nor is there physical evidence he existed,[note 1] but the islanders continue to ceremoniously honor him. After the war the US Navy attempted to talk the people out of it, but by that point it was too late and the religious movement had taken hold.

    Subsequently the people of Tanna have been waiting over sixty years for the cargo to return. Then again, as mentioned in the quote above, Christians have been waiting more than two thousand years for their guy to come back.

    Modern cargo cult believers do exist, although most see John Frum and the like merely as manifestations of the same divinity worshiped in other parts of the world, and treat the trappings of the belief as a worship service rather than a magical collection of talismans.

    John Frum

    According to the cult today, John Frum was a literate white US serviceman that appeared to the village elders in a vision in the late 1930s.[1] However, as early as 1949 there were people saying the "origin of the movement or the cause started more than thirty years ago", putting "John Frum" in the 1910s.[3] Interestingly, until the 1950s John Frum's identity varied from Melanesian native, to black serviceman, to white navy serviceman before more or less settling into the literate white US serviceman identity, though some belief in the older variants can still be found.

    However, the closest thing actual recorded history shows is that from 1940 to 1947 not only were there three illiterate natives who took up the name John Frum (Manehevi (1940-41), Neloaig (1943, inspired people to build an airstrip) and Iokaeye (1947, preached a new color symbolism)) and were exiled or thrown into jail for the trouble they stirred up, but there were also three people saying they were the "sons" of John Frum in 1942.[4] To further complicate matters, "Tom Navy" is thought by some to be based in part on Tom Beatty of Mississippi, who served in the New Hebrides both as a missionary, and as a Navy Seabee during the war.

    The John Frum cult caused so many problems that in 1957 there was an effort made to prove John Frum didn't exist. It totally failed.[5]

    By the 1960s, the natives were carrying around pictures of men they believed to be John Frum. In 2006, when asked why they still believed in his coming after some 60 years of waiting, the Chief said, "You Christians have been waiting 2,000 years for Jesus to return to earth, and you haven’t given up hope."[1]

    Prince Phillip

    Not all Melanesian cargo cults have philosophical myths as founders. Some, such as the Rusefel (Roosevelt) Cargo Cult,[6] latched on to the name of a real person as their founder… even if that person could not have been their cult's founder. The Johnson Cult of New Hanover Island in current-day Papua New Guinea was formerly thought to be a cargo cult but the current thinking is that it was just political theater,[7] which just goes to show Poe's Law.

    The most notable of these (in part because he was alive to learn about it) is Prince Phillip, who is revered by a village in Vanuatu after they identified him with a legendary mountain spirit that was said to have "married a powerful woman from across the sea". The prince appears to have taken the news of his divinity in stride and remains on good terms with his worshippers
    Christ myth theory

    Discounting the idea that docetism is part of the Christ myth, the concept goes back to the 1790s with the ideas of Constantin-François VolneyWikipedia and of Charles-François DupuisWikipedia.

    However, Volney and Dupuis did not agree on a definition of the Christ myth. Dupuis held that there was no human being involved in the New Testament account, which he saw as an intentional extended allegory of solar myths. Volney, on the other hand, allowed for confused memories of an obscure historical figure to be integrated in a mythology that compiled organically.[2] So from nearly the get-go the modern Christ Myth theory had two parallel lines of thought:

    There was no human being behind the person portrayed in the New Testament.
    Confused memories of an obscure historical figure became woven into the mythology.

    For the most part, the no human being behind the New Testament version is presented as the Christ myth theory, ignoring Volney's confused memories of an obscure historical figure version.

    In fact, as the John Frum cargo cult shows, even in as short a time as some 11 years after a message starts being noticed by unbelievers, the question of the founder being an actual person or a renamed existing deity is already unclear[3] and in a few more years the oral tradition has forgotten the possible human founder (illiterate native named Manehivi who caused trouble using that name from 1940 to 1941 and was exiled from his island as a result) and replaced him with a version (literate white US serviceman who appeared to the village elders in a vision on February 15, late 1930s) better suited to the cult.
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory

    Eyewitnesses

    If there were any records of actual eyewitnesses to Jesus's life and deeds then that would be evidence. However the only person known to have been in the right place and right time was Paul...and he repeatedly states that everything he is relaying about Jesus is coming though visions. [...]

    Paul

    When talking about Paul we need to remember there are four Pauls in the New Testament[146]:

    Authentic or Early Paul: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon (50s-60s A.D.)
    Disputed Paul or Deutero-Pauline: 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians (80-100 A.D.)
    Pseudo-Paul or the Pastorals: 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (80-100 A.D.)
    Tendentious or Legendary Paul: Acts of the Apostles (90-130 A.D.)

    When looking for evidence from Paul regarding a possible historical Jesus it makes sense to only look at the Authentic or Early Paul as "[t]he remaining letters do indeed deviate too greatly from Pauline style to be his hand or even his dictation" as, being forgeries and therefore of even more dubious provenance with no obvious link to anyone connected to Jesus, they cannot provide any information for the historicity of Jesus.[147] Simply put: We don't know who wrote the "non-Pauline" epistles, when they were penned, or whether their authors knew the first thing about any historical Jesus. Just assuming that they give useful information about the historical Jesus would be taking their content and accuracy on, well, faith.

    The earliest (genuine) Pauline writings about Jesus — traditionally dated[148] 52-67 CE, earlier than any gospels, canonical or not — were composed by Paul of Tarsus, a man who never met a physical Jesus but who claimed to have seen a light and heard a voice.[149] This depiction and the conversion experience is taken at face value by Christian doctrine as proof that Jesus not only existed but was risen as the Messiah. (The same Christians do not accept other religions' similar visions as fact.) No witnesses to this conversion event are mentioned by Paul or anyone else.

    Paul had no knowledge of Jesus' early life, just his claimed ultimate activities, and his teachings sometimes seem at variance with those of Jesus in the Gospels. He also does not mention the handful of churches that arose in Jesus' name, but having nothing to do with his own Christianity. Although Paul writes about numerous other people seeing Jesus, he provides no corroborating evidence or means by which they could be identified. He does (e.g. in Galatians) speak of meeting some of the Disciples, but, as the John Frum cult shows, even the mention of James (the Just) as Jesus' brother doesn't mean much as John Frum got Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (who has only sisters) as a brother only 17 years after the first record of his movement.

    This is assuming that the James who Paul is referencing is in any way connected to any of the Jameses in the Gospels or Acts.
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eviden...f_Jesus_Christ

  26. #106
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,671
    Mentioned
    378 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BandD View Post
    @Eliza Thomason

    I was suspicious of a priest once and I looked him up and turns out my hunches were correct and he had a real criminal charge against him (for indecent exposure, didn't say anything about children or minors thank god). I wondered what else he was up to and it bothered/sickened me. I don't want him to hurt anybody else and I worry about it- but I mean, I don't want people to punish him too harshly as well cuz that could also have bad consequences. I just wish there was an easy way to stop them, but maybe you have to completely castrate them. By then though a forced court order of castration seems like it's too late and they already abused so many...

    I'm wary how the 'normal world' handles this thing cuz I mean.. .maybe you're so right. You have to leave it up to God cuz the worldly consequences of course don't always work.

    I think it's so common and so fucked up the moral failings of some ppl in the Priesthood. (but also I guess maybe they are there to learn and grow from their shadow side as well?) Perverts and immoral ppl trying to teach us morals... (I use pervert in the negative sense of course as I don't think being a 'pervert' is always a bad thing if you mean it as just a person with a high sex drive & curious nature, as I'm more liberal with sexual things... but in this context I mean it the way a Delta ST str8 man would say it I guess. loL)

    I don't even like prison for them as often times they themselves will now be sexually abused way worse than what they ever did to others. That isn't right either. I don't even get justifying that, even though it's a normal reaction to be like 'oh yeah take that you pedo!' But that's not doing that, that's just adding more rape/molestation to the world. I can't see it as reaping what you are sowing when the reaps are so much more brutal than the sows. This horrible world.

    /prays with you

    (I don't mean to be funny or make fun of you, I really like you and u have helped me seen the light of God honestly even if I am just a sinful demonic Beta.)
    Thank you BandD. I appreciate you, a person of good will who likes to be honest and say it as you see it.

    A lot of us who have followed the unedifying revelations of the Catholic clergy abuse crisis by this time know exactly how things got this bad in clergy. It was a planned Masonic infiltration (through various channels) who stated their goals long ago. One infiltration is at the seminary level, where only men with no supernatural faith ere selected, who were prone to sin, or were weak. Good men of faith were systematically weeded out and denied access to the priesthood. We have many matching testimonies to that. Our only hope now is to pray for the healing and faith of these weak priests. God is able. He is greater than all the evil influences around them. He desires to make all men whole, and heal the inner wounds that plague them.

    Hierarchy who are the cronies of the truly depraved McCarrick, like Bernadine and Gregory, go to ANY length to protect their crony-abusers. Likewise the many American Bishops (but the problem is worldwide) who will not rise to the red of martyrdom that they wear and stand for the truth at any cost. So we lay Catholics REJOICE when the government get involves, because we want justice for the victims - and at this time the government offers the only justice available.

    I am glad you find it all offensive because it is. They should be not allowed to practice as a priest, for sure. If they repent and convert, great. They can do penance and pray for the Church. And yes, what happens in prison should not happen, and yes it would be wrong to wish evil on even the most evil and depraved. But the current "no consequence" for abusers is unfair to the victims, because they will just keep on perpetrating. They are addicted and can't stop. Victims need to be protected.

    But good news is that as we see evil rise around us, also we will also see many more MIRACLES than any other time. The evil ones are active, but God and his saints and angles are very active, too! God cares for every single soul he created and He sends many miraculous graces down to help people who are handicapped with living in these times.

    Thanks for all your kind words BandD. I like you. Interesting that you had a hunch about that priest and it turned out to be right. It is your intuition, which should be strong as an IEI. Your gift.

    When I converted to Catholic, from my Evangelical tradition which I loved, with so many good faithful people, I was amazed at the impoverished spirits of many parishioners and priests I met at Sunday Mass (daily Mass was a great place to find devout believers when I could get to it). I thought, "These Catholics are rich, and they act like they are paupers! They don't know the treasures they have!" [I told that to one of the only two from my protestant church who wanted to know why I became Catholic, and later God gave me a great gift, and while I was marveling over the gift, He said to me, interiorly, "You spoke of the Church's treasures. Here is one of those treasures!". Later, over time, especially in recent years, I have a fuller understanding how "Deep Church" has purposely and systematically hidden the faith and it's true treasures from them. That is why they don't know.

    The situation is bad with infiltration but we wait for God to act, who promised not to let the gates of hell prevail against His Church. They are trying, but they will not succeed. So because of infiltration, in many ways, things are ugly in Jesus' Church right now. The Bride of Christ is going through her passion, and it is not pretty. But it is still Jesus' Church, and He still works through it. He promised the Holy Spirit would be with it until the end of time. No matter how bad it gets, it will not be abandoned by God.
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  27. #107
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,671
    Mentioned
    378 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default St. Thomas Aquinas

    @Subteigh when my husband and saw me on 16T he asked if I was "throwing pearls to swine again". He meant you, because he sees my stress when you insult my deeply held beliefs; he knows the time I put into sincere replies to the questions you like to put out there for me to answer for you. After which, you have never offered any positive acknowledgement of any point I ever made. So it doesn't feel like a conversation. It is something else.

    I told him I wasn't writing you and if did it would be after quite some time. So he quoted St. Thomas Aquinas, which I will share now. I know you have spent a great deal of time studying and extolling the works of the most most depraved and existential philosophers you can find, but now hear words of a good man in a whole different class from your favored friends, renowned and unmatched in all of history not only for his extremely superior mind and logic but also his great virtue and faith.

    ................................

    .....“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”


    Faith is a virtue. I want to learn from the greatest, wisest persons who lived in great virtue, not people who lived depraved lives of sin like many of those you extol. Sin compromises intelligence. Why do you waste your time with the confused drivel of renowned sinners? To impress other ignorant people? To leave them confused and thinking they missed something, and that you must be smarter than them? How trite. What a waste of your mind and life.

    My husband continued by citing the final quote in the parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus:

    ..............."31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

    To this my husband added, "For someone with a stubborn resistance to God or anything supernatural, there is NO kind of event they will not dismiss."

    That often looks like it is your "cause". To hold a stubborn resistance to God or anything supernatural. Am I right? Then what a useless exercise for me to to answer your questions, when you don't really want ANY answers, you just want to play your "cause", and oppose anything I say. In a true civil conversation of good will, one seeks and expresses points of agreement, even if one must politely express a view to the contrary.

    And this story reminds me of the Pharisees and another good man named Lazarus, the wealthy, prominent friend of Jesus, brother of Mary Magdalen and of Martha. The Pharisees had said they would not believe unless they saw a man rise from the dead, and Jesus let his good friend Lazarus die a horrible slow death, and then rot in the tomb for three days, grieving Mary and Martha greatly, before He resurrected him, shouting, "Lazarus, Come out!" in the presence of large crowd that included the prideful, mocking and scoffing Pharisees. The great miracle only infuriated the Pharisees. And of course, they did not believe. Nothing would make them believe, because they did not want.

    But Subteigh, even though your Bible favorite is Judas Iscariot, your favored philosophers are depraved, and you like to play the part of the wicked Pharisees, God has blessed me with supernatural hope, and I believe there there is more depth in your heart than what you show here.



    __________________________________________________ _________________________________

    The entire parable is in Luke 16 is here:

    19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

    20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

    21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

    22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

    23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

    24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

    25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

    26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

    27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

    28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

    29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

    30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

    31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

    Last edited by Eliza Thomason; 11-02-2020 at 01:01 AM.
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  28. #108
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,263
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BandD View Post
    Yeah I mean, tbh I think Christianity for most Americans ends up about getting to go to Heaven and then smugly looking down at people you never liked in Hell. ie homophobic Christians fantasize about watching homosexuals being tortured in Hell while they laugh at them and can eternally enjoy their own smug superiority. It's about getting a sadistic rise in viewing people you think should be tortured forever.

    Maybe it has some good points. Like anything else. However in a realistic sense, it's obviously just as sadistic to gleefully watch somebody being tortured forever even if you think they deserve it. ((note I said 'forever' it's not that bad if you want to watch it for a little bit as that's just part of the justice process.))

    Like your own campy example of a person who tortured innocent babies being tortured in Hell as a punishment. It makes people feel very good thinking they are being tortured forever in Hell because of it. But this isn't actually a 'correction' or a moral good- it's just an emotional impulse that makes us feel better at a villain getting their comeuppance. And it doesn't even really take into account most pedophiles were also once victims that were abused and groomed themselves. It's very emotionally & ethically simplistic even tho on paper it might seem super just and 'right.' Bad people deserve bad right?

    But 'forever' is such a long time. Even if God does think they deserve such a fate, I would think it would also be ethical for these smug self-rigeteous "Christians" to not be able to witness it and not receive indirect sadistic pleasure from it while getting foot massages in Heaven from Mexicans.

    This doesn't mean that we should all be super soft liberal la de dah about crime or anything, I mean- some people probably do deserve to be killed for their heinous immoral actions. But killing them once is sufficient enough to protect society from them, having some fantasy where they are killed over and over in your own mind so you can feel better and like you're "more good" - I don't get how that's really 'righteous' or makes you actually more "good" then them or anything. Remember what Cercei said to Septa Unella?

    That's why we draw a line in the sand the difference between "justice" and "revenge", right? If anything to me, it makes the person just as bad or worse- which is why most judges and authority figures should be trusted as much as most criminals. They send a bad guy to prison for the rest of their lives and then also masturbate at night to the fact that they're being punished in Hell long after they die- and then have stuck-up fantasies where God will 'reward them more than most people' just because they never cracked a smile in their entire lives and try to exploit the middle and lower classes from buying their shitty crime novels. They all tend to scapegoat Lust as being a worse sin than Greed, but their own shitty Greed has also fucked up lives and families.

    It is a worship of sadism (and real satanism) disguised as something Heavenly.

    Even if you're not like this, what makes a person think they're so special that they can ascend to Heaven and ignore all the suffering and pain in the world. There was a Buffy comic like this lol, she had the choice go to Heaven and just live happily forever and she said "No wait, I can't. I have friends down there. I have to help them." And she sacrificed her own happiness to help others, like she always does. That to me is more righteous and just then some lazy POS pretending to be "good" so they can get some spoiled Hotel Room in the sky (with a beautifully immaculate sky-view of sinful homosexuals being chopped up all the time for their own self-righteous viewing pleasure)
    Look at bnd, flexing his Ti and owning.

    Most satanists are more Christan than Christians and most Christians are more satanic than any Satanist. Go figure.

  29. #109
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,866
    Mentioned
    294 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    @Eliza Thomason
    Being careful not to insult the "most deeply held beliefs" of others...

    Do you believe that Vishnu reincarnated as Rama?

    Do you believe that the Buddha when he died reached "parinirvana (final nirvana, the end of rebirth and suffering achieved after the death of the body)"?

    Do you believe that Muhammad received a divine message from God via the angel Jibreel (Gabriel)?

    Do you believe that Joseph Smith received a divine message from God via the angel Moroni?

    Do you believe that the incident at Roswell in 1947 involved a flying saucer and aliens?

    Do you believe that Kim Jong-un is a god?
    Quality shitpost, but missing the point regardless. You're missing a rather important thing in regards to the Catholic conception if "eternity". You see, God is eternal, but few ever consider what that means. For instance, God says a million years is an instant and an instant is a million years. You see, for God, the "End of the World" is now. The "Beginning of the world" is now. This is why "deathbed" repentance, among other things, is possible. While ye may have defied God all your life, if at that last moment you repented, God accepts that for, to him, you "always" did in his eyes.

    Granted, this will make your time in purgatory especially painful but you knew that as you made that choice. Again I say unto you all, God is many things, but chief amongst them is Love, Truth, and Justice. You must atone for your sins, all of them, in the end. The only real question the faithful must ask is if they're really and truly willing to endure their "just deserts" from the ultimate judge as it were. If you truly can, rejoice, for ye will join Christ in paradise as surely as that criminal who was crucified beside him did.

    If not, well, I can only pray that your life served as an example to others. A great tale as to why one ought not refuse the divine and merciful hand that is extended in infinite love towards them...

  30. #110
    divine, too human WVBRY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    6,036
    Mentioned
    241 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aramas View Post
    Most satanists are more Christan than Christians and most Christians are more satanic than any Satanist. Go figure.
    This made me lol, but it's so true.


  31. #111
    💩 Nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    TIM
    POOP™
    Posts
    439
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think I get it now, "faith", you can't argue against it, because it doesn't care, because it can't listen. Thousands of religions and they all have faith that they are right and other religions are wrong. You don't need ears with faith, you don't need eyes, you don't need anything. You just need to hold your faith above all else and believe and feel it, without hesitance. It's blind, it's deaf, it can justify anything, and it exudes pure confidence in doing so. Jesus Christ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Aramas View Post
    Just rename this place Beta Central lmao
    Quote Originally Posted by MidnightWilderness View Post
    The only problem socionics has given me is a propensity to analyze every relationship from the lens of socionics and I also see that it is worse in my boyfriend. Nothing makes any sense that way and it does not really solve any problems.





  32. #112
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,866
    Mentioned
    294 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody View Post
    I think I get it now, "faith", you can't argue against it, because it doesn't care, because it can't listen. Thousands of religions and they all have faith that they are right and other religions are wrong. You don't need ears with faith, you don't need eyes, you don't need anything. You just need to hold your faith above all else and believe and feel it, without hesitance. It's blind, it's deaf, it can justify anything, and it exudes pure confidence in doing so. Jesus Christ...
    Once again, quality shitpost. Here's a purely secular take that explains why zealots always beat secularists. See, feelings/morals>facts, Culture>Politics, and 2+2=5 if and when the mob says it does despite the "fact" it does not.

    Sad fact is, the most "intolerant" faction in any given war tends to win out....

  33. #113
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,431
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    ...your error comes from your blind faith.

    Actually, no, accusing Christians for “blind faith” is a common misconception.

    Christians actually embrace the biblical definition of faith. This definition of faith is faith preceded by knowledge;

    One cannot possess faith in God until he/she comes to knowledge of God. Thus, faith is not accepting what one cannot prove:

    --Faith cannot outrun knowledge, for it is dependent upon knowledge (Romans 10:17).
    --Abraham came to faith only after he came to knowledge of God’s promises and was persuaded (Romans 4:20-21)
    --The Apostle Peter says to give a reason for the hope you believe in (1 Peter 3:15)

    People are called upon to have faith only after receiving adequate knowledge. In fact, the Bible demands that the thinker be:

    --rational in gathering information
    --examining the evidence, and
    --reasoning properly about the evidence, thereby drawing only warranted conclusions.

    Paul articulated this when he wrote "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess 5:21), John too echoed the same thoughts when he said to "test the spirits" (1 John 4:1).

    All this in fact, is essentially the law of rationality in philosophical circles: one should draw conclusions which are justified by the evidence.

    "Blind faith" is an exaggeration

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Except we are told that Jesus was arrested immediately after:

    - Mark 14:32-50

    Except if God exists, miracles are not a crazy thing ---> That is a reasonable statement

    If an omniscient, omnipotent, supernatural being does exist, he could work a number of supernatural miracles:

    --If there was no universe, and he chose to create one, he could speak it into existence (Psalm 33:6-9)
    --He could ensure what writer of His choosing penned what He wanted mankind to know
    --If He wanted to let mankind to know that He created the world and everything in it, He could tell them through his divinely inspired writers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    You must start with observations first, not conclusions...your error comes from your blind faith.
    Naturalistic atheism contends that:

    --Matter came from nothing, yet no such thing has ever been observed to happen (Observation first??).
    --Biological life came from non-life, yet science has known for many decades that, in nature, life only comes from pre-existing life.
    --Water evolved on earth from dust and dirt over millions of years
    --Donkeys evolved from fish
    etc etc

    How is it that all of that does not require faith either??

    Same thing for you. Faith is (not blind faith) preceded by some sort of knowledge.
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 11-02-2020 at 05:10 PM.

  34. #114
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    @Subteigh when my husband and saw me on 16T he asked if I was "throwing pearls to swine again". He meant you, because he sees my stress when you insult my deeply held beliefs; he knows the time I put into sincere replies to the questions you like to put out there for me to answer for you. After which, you have never offered any positive acknowledgement of any point I ever made. So it doesn't feel like a conversation. It is something else.

    I told him I wasn't writing you and if did it would be after quite some time. So he quoted St. Thomas Aquinas, which I will share now. I know you have spent a great deal of time studying and extolling the works of the most most depraved and existential philosophers you can find, but now hear words of a good man in a whole different class from your favored friends, renowned and unmatched in all of history not only for his extremely superior mind and logic but also his great virtue and faith.[/SIZE][/COLOR][/B][/FONT][/INDENT]
    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    @Eliza Thomason
    Being careful not to insult the "most deeply held beliefs" of others...

    Do you believe that Vishnu reincarnated as Rama?

    Do you believe that the Buddha when he died reached "parinirvana (final nirvana, the end of rebirth and suffering achieved after the death of the body)"?

    Do you believe that Muhammad received a divine message from God via the angel Jibreel (Gabriel)?

    Do you believe that Joseph Smith received a divine message from God via the angel Moroni?

    Do you believe that the incident at Roswell in 1947 involved a flying saucer and aliens?

    Do you believe that Kim Jong-un is a god?
    Aquinas was one of the most inanely dogmatic individuals to have ever lived.

  35. #115
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Faith is a virtue. I want to learn from the greatest, wisest persons who lived in great virtue, not people who lived depraved lives of sin like many of those you extol. Sin compromises intelligence. Why do you waste your time with the confused drivel of renowned sinners? To impress other ignorant people? To leave them confused and thinking they missed something, and that you must be smarter than them? How trite. What a waste of your mind and life.

    My husband continued by citing the final quote in the parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus:

    ..............."31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

    To this my husband added, "For someone with a stubborn resistance to God or anything supernatural, there is NO kind of event they will not dismiss."

    That often looks like it is your "cause". To hold a stubborn resistance to God or anything supernatural. Am I right? Then what a useless exercise for me to to answer your questions, when you don't really want ANY answers, you just want to play your "cause", and oppose anything I say. In a true civil conversation of good will, one seeks and expresses points of agreement, even if one must politely express a view to the contrary.

    And this story reminds me of the Pharisees and another good man named Lazarus, the wealthy, prominent friend of Jesus, brother of Mary Magdalen and of Martha. The Pharisees had said they would not believe unless they saw a man rise from the dead, and Jesus let his good friend Lazarus die a horrible slow death, and then rot in the tomb for three days, grieving Mary and Martha greatly, before He resurrected him, shouting, "Lazarus, Come out!" in the presence of large crowd that included the prideful, mocking and scoffing Pharisees. The great miracle only infuriated the Pharisees. And of course, they did not believe. Nothing would make them believe, because they did not want.

    But Subteigh, even though your Bible favorite is Judas Iscariot, your favored philosophers are depraved, and you like to play the part of the wicked Pharisees, God has blessed me with supernatural hope, and I believe there there is more depth in your heart than what you show here.



    __________________________________________________ _________________________________

    The entire parable is in Luke 16 is here:

    19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

    20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

    21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

    22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

    23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

    24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

    25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

    26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

    27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

    28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

    29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

    30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

    31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

    I don't regard believing without evidence to be a virtue. If you believe something without evidence, you are capable of believing anything without evidence. Although seeing as you do this, you may not be able to see why that is a problem.

    The "God" of the bible engaged in or promoted genocide, murder, rape, slavery, and torture. The papacy includes individuals who did the same. I consider myself to have a better standard than that. I don't think it is a matter of intelligence.

    Either death is irreversible, or it isn't. If it is reversible, then why would you consider that a supernatural act? Why does such an act mean I should believe in a being that has no observable properties? If a being promotes genocide, murder, rape, slavery, torture, cannibalism etc. like that worshipped by Catholics...why should I worship that being just because they do something you think is amazing?

    A being resurrecting someone from the dead would make me believe in them, but NOT because they resurrected someone from the dead...but because I had observed them. You seem to treat belief as an act of loyalty - why? The truth does not care if you believe in it or not.

  36. #116
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Quality shitpost, but missing the point regardless. You're missing a rather important thing in regards to the Catholic conception if "eternity". You see, God is eternal, but few ever consider what that means. For instance, God says a million years is an instant and an instant is a million years. You see, for God, the "End of the World" is now. The "Beginning of the world" is now. This is why "deathbed" repentance, among other things, is possible. While ye may have defied God all your life, if at that last moment you repented, God accepts that for, to him, you "always" did in his eyes.

    Granted, this will make your time in purgatory especially painful but you knew that as you made that choice. Again I say unto you all, God is many things, but chief amongst them is Love, Truth, and Justice. You must atone for your sins, all of them, in the end. The only real question the faithful must ask is if they're really and truly willing to endure their "just deserts" from the ultimate judge as it were. If you truly can, rejoice, for ye will join Christ in paradise as surely as that criminal who was crucified beside him did.

    If not, well, I can only pray that your life served as an example to others. A great tale as to why one ought not refuse the divine and merciful hand that is extended in infinite love towards them...
    You seem to think I should fear God's opinion more than my own conscience. That's as though you do things contrary to your conscience because you believe someone else says you should act differently. That is no way to live.

    You also seem to think that I should act out of fear of punishment, and the hope of a reward.

    I do not defy "God". I cannot defy something I don't believe in the existence of.

    Your "God" punished an innocent individual, gives no punishment to his favourites, and gives a disproportionate punishment to the majority despite already had its bloodlust satiated with a sacrifice because they honestly could not believe in it (whether due to matters of fact, disgust at ideology, or pure ignorance). That is the exact opposite of Love, Truth, and Justice.

  37. #117
    Farewell, comrades Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Actually, no, accusing Christians for “blind faith” is a common misconception.

    Christians actually embrace the biblical definition of faith. This definition of faith is faith preceded by knowledge;

    One cannot possess faith in God until he/she comes to knowledge of God. Thus, faith is not accepting what one cannot prove:

    --Faith cannot outrun knowledge, for it is dependent upon knowledge (Romans 10:17).
    --Abraham came to faith only after he came to knowledge of God’s promises and was persuaded (Romans 4:20-21)
    --The Apostle Peter says to give a reason for the hope you believe in (1 Peter 3:15)

    People are called upon to have faith only after receiving adequate knowledge. In fact, the Bible demands that the thinker be:

    --rational in gathering information
    --examining the evidence, and
    --reasoning properly about the evidence, thereby drawing only warranted conclusions.

    Paul articulated this when he wrote "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess 5:21), John too echoed the same thoughts when he said to "test the spirits" (1 John 4:1).

    All this in fact, is essentially the law of rationality in philosophical circles: one should draw conclusions which are justified by the evidence.

    "Blind faith" is an exaggeration
    Jesus blessed those who believed without evidence, while notably did not bless Thomas who only believed in the resurrection after he had touched Jesus' body. That is notably in the bible. If Thomas in the gospels was not even able to believe in the resurrection despite allegedly having seen all the miracles that Jesus had done...including resurrect someone from the dead...I can only conclude that these stories were passion plays designed to sway those to convert to Christianity in its early history. If even Thomas did not believe without evidence, then I have good read to believe the miracles were all made up.

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Except if God exists, miracles are not a crazy thing ---> That is a reasonable statement

    If an omniscient, omnipotent, supernatural being does exist, he could work a number of supernatural miracles:

    --If there was no universe, and he chose to create one, he could speak it into existence (Psalm 33:6-9)
    --He could ensure what writer of His choosing penned what He wanted mankind to know
    --If He wanted to let mankind to know that He created the world and everything in it, He could tell them through his divinely inspired writers.
    A miracle as I understand it is something supernatural - i.e. not natural, contrary to the laws of nature. But by that definition, it necessarily follows that a miracle cannot happen, because every phenomenon is necessarily natural, within the laws of nature. If you point at a miracle, I merely see a natural event.

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Naturalistic atheism contends that:

    --Matter came from nothing, yet no such thing has ever been observed to happen (Observation first??).
    --Biological life came from non-life, yet science has known for many decades that, in nature, life only comes from pre-existing life.
    --Water evolved on earth from dust and dirt over millions of years
    --Donkeys evolved from fish
    etc etc

    How is it that all of that does not require faith either??

    Same thing for you. Faith is (not blind faith) preceded by some sort of knowledge.
    "Atheism" is simply defined as a lack of belief in the existence of gods. It does not require any belief, and is not an ideology tied with the baggage you try to pack in with it.

    Again...the only person who says that Something came from Nothing is you. I don't believe that. For all I know, matter is indestructible.

    Define what you mean by "life". That is a very loaded term. We know that in nature, that long-chain molecules such as RNA are able to form - these are normally considered inanimate, lifeless. But the distinction between what is life and what is not life is arbitrary.

    "science has known for many decades that, in nature, life only comes from pre-existing life." - What? "Science" makes no such claim. It is bad science to claim as knowledge something that is unfalsifiable - "you can't prove a negative." - I could well say that by that standard, that completely destroys your argument for "God" - we have not observed this supposedly all-powerful, ever-present being ANYWHERE, at ANY SCALE. Scientists don't make observations such as "We have not observed God" in scientific journals - they start from observations first - no Yahweh "God" being has been observed and defined in a way that could qualify as a hypothesis which could be tested.

    The evidence shows that donkeys did in fact evolve from fish.

  38. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is you life here. If you behave by one way - you are feeling happier. If you do good to others - this should do better to you too (alike by karma links). If you are accented on good feelings to reality and its parts - you are accepting the Creation and hence God's will and this should help to feel better. If you are feeling the acceptance with own heart/soul (as it's Creation's part) - follow to it - then you are feeling good. If you are feeling joined state with God - you are feeling happy and the life goes not bad also.

    While "Heaven, Hell and Purgatory" after death conceptions should be paganic folklore included to Christianity to be easier understood and accepted. It's some possibly that a part of you as a "soul", what is not your human personality or your mind has after death links to other forms of the life or with other beings - in other dimentions or place/times. The idea about a place where your mind suffers eternally or feels good eternally - looks rather strange. Emotions or sensations relate to bodies, while a soul is something other.

  39. #119
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,866
    Mentioned
    294 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    You seem to think I should fear God's opinion more than my own conscience. That's as though you do things contrary to your conscience because you believe someone else says you should act differently. That is no way to live.

    You also seem to think that I should act out of fear of punishment, and the hope of a reward.

    I do not defy "God". I cannot defy something I don't believe in the existence of.

    Your "God" punished an innocent individual, gives no punishment to his favourites, and gives a disproportionate punishment to the majority despite already had its bloodlust satiated with a sacrifice because they honestly could not believe in it (whether due to matters of fact, disgust at ideology, or pure ignorance). That is the exact opposite of Love, Truth, and Justice.
    Damn, I don't much like Voltaire but his one prayer is being answered here. "Lord, make my enemies ridiculous" and he stated that God granted it. In his eyes, his enemies were indeed ridiculous somehow.

    You need to read more Catholic theologians/bone up on our dogma. I'd start with Aquinas as he bitch slaps your Atheism so thoroughly that none of your alleged kind has managed to successfully refute all of his points such that you'd convert the average theist to atheism who hadn't already turned their back on God beforehand somehow. After all, if some Chad-tier Atheist had done so oh you bet your ass that essay/book/tome would have been crammed down the throat of everyone who lived because it'd be "The Imperial Truth" made manifest as it were. If you get that reference without resorting to Google than congrats, you're a nerd .
    Last edited by End; 11-03-2020 at 04:13 AM.

  40. #120
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    5,727
    Mentioned
    525 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Damn, I don't much like Voltaire but his one prayer is being answered here. "Lord, make my enemies ridiculous" and he stated that God granted it. In his eyes, his enemies were indeed ridiculous somehow.

    You need to read more Catholic theologians/bone up on our dogma. I'd start with Aquinas as he bitch slaps your Atheism so thoroughly that none of your alleged kind has managed to successfully refute all of his points such that you'd convert the average theist to atheism who hadn't already turned their back on God beforehand somehow. After all, if some Chad-tier Atheist had done so oh you bet your ass that essay/book/tome would have been crammed down the throat of everyone who lived because it'd be "The Imperial Truth" made manifest as it were. If you get that reference without resorting to Google than congrats, you're a nerd .
    See, in an online debate or discussion, it's pretty useless to say "Aquinas would bitch slap your atheism so thoroughly" when you can't replicate the arguments he'd supposedly use for that purpose, given that Aquinas is in the public domain, you can freely copy-paste, and you can respond in as much time and as many words as you like. If you think something Aquinas wrote could disprove SubT, you have every means of proving that! But you can't seriously expect anyone to go read the entire Summa Theologica any more than I could expect you to watch a thirty-hour video series on how our oligarchs are secretly lizards in people-suits. If no atheist has gone to the trouble of going through, point-by-point, every argument Aquinas ever made, and writing a systematic response, it's because they just don't care, not because they're struck dumb by his brilliance. It would be an extraordinary amount of effort to go through, and for little purpose; nobody's minds would be changed by doing that. As with people who watch lizard-people videos, the only people swayed by Aquinas are people who already believe.

    It's interesting that you apparently recognize this, and try to turn this around: "such that you'd convert the average theist to atheism who hadn't already turned their back on God beforehand somehow". Of course you can't prove this except by tautology: anyone convinced by rational debate to become an atheist must have already "turned their back on God." But I'm curious how you'd explain the fact that debates of this sort far more frequently convince people to leave religion rather than the other way about, and, with a few rare exceptions, people only become religious because they were born into the faith.
    Last edited by FreelancePoliceman; 11-03-2020 at 04:43 AM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •