The bible

[Saint Guinefort]

They are, but only by using negative predicates.

Give me an example please. Thanks.

You do not get to speak for God. Omniscience fallacy.

So you have never read the Bible???? Wow. Try picking up a copy some time. Hit up Matthew 7:15. I'm doing my job.

Let me know if you ever get around to reading the Bible or even parts of it. We can talk more then.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

you're just another God denier......but not an old testament one.....

And you appear to be a lying, ravening wolf.

I make no bones about my failure to believe in your god. I wish you could be honest about your god or your beliefs.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

you aren't an old testament prophet.

you're just another God denier......

Even the old testament Prophets knew periods exist and you don't have to liberally sprinkle ellipses throughout your posts like a moron.

and apparently a slave to modernism and its "rules" for communication.......

 

[Into the Night]

which you don't seem to understand.......


atheists deny, agnostics say they have no proof.....the ignorant deny that distinction.......now choose......what are you?......an atheist, an agnostic, or merely an ignorant poster.............

Wrong. An atheist means 'no religion', and is one that has no religion at all. They do not try to claim that any god or gods exist or not. They simply don't go there.
An agnostic means 'no god', and is one that believes in a god or gods but does not know or care the characteristics of that god or gods. Such takes the form of an amorphous 'no definition' of such god or gods.
Perry belongs to a religion, which I call the Church of No God. This is a fundamentalist style religion, since it tries to prove no god or gods exist (which is not possible).

Like any religion, it is based on some initial circular argument, with arguments extending from that.

The other name for the circular argument (not a fallacy, by the way), is the Argument of Faith.

It is not possible to prove any circular argument. To make such an attempt causes the circular argument fallacy. This what a fundamentalist does.

It is not possible to prove whether any god or gods exist or not. All one can do is present evidence for their position. Evidence is not a proof.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Wanna know why? .

you're dimwitted and think denial will win the argument for you?......

I know this because unlike you I actually DO have a couple graduate degrees

as do I.....a Juris Doctorate and a Masters in Theology.......what are yours?......

 

[Into the Night]

Is this some form of "joke"? It doesn't come across as particularly funny. YOU? Have a "Masters in theology"? LOL. It sure doesn't read like you do.

Can I ask why you so viciously mock Christianity with your ravening wolf act?

It is no joke. A masters of theology degree exists. Proof by identity.
Whether he has one or not is irrelevant. Claims of degrees, certifications, licenses, experience, or any other means of self or government sanctification mean nothing on blind forums such as JPP.

The theology degree is not a proof that any god or gods exist or not.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

as previously shown, that is a lie.....

Not shown. Ergo are YOU lying now?

one traces his genealogy for the Jews, the other for the Greeks.......different systems......note that one notes the women in his family history.....

It appears you haven't actually read the Gospels. May I ask why various MALES present in one are missing in the other? How many different versions of YOUR ancestry do you have?

There are various "explanations" for the differences but they are just guesses and exegeses to make sense of what is far more likely to simply be two different people making up two different stories about the same concept.

I assume you've never heard of Ockham's Razor. But if you have two competing explanations and one is FAR more complex and requires a lot more guesses to make it work it is probably not the correct one.

Sure you could make up all manner of "greek vs hebrew" etc. which won't really explain why Mark lists Solomon but Luke doesn't or why BOTH OF THEM END WITH JOSEPH right before Jesus.

Again, I'm also uncertain why Joseph matters AT ALL in ANY geneology of Jesus. I mean Joseph wasn't even INVOLVED. Unless you have a very different version of Christology than everyone else does.

 

[Into the Night]

You are wrong. You have a masters in theology and you don't understand what Huxley meant by "agnostic"? That's not surprising given your level of apparent mendacity.

Agnostics feel that the question can never be answered. Atheists (like myself) feel that it doesn't need to be answered. That if there is no evidence for something then I have no need to believe in it or even assess whether it is real or not. I am NOT an agnostic about the presence of invisible micro-elephants living in my fridge. I see no evidence for them so I fail to believe in them.

You have a masters in theology just as much as I do. Except I know more about the faith than you do, apparently.

Both agnostics and atheists feel the question of any religion being True simply don't need to be answered. The difference I have already explained.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I make no bones about my failure to believe in your god.

sure you have......you can't seem to make up your mind whether you deny his existence or if you're simply waiting for proof.......using your own silly terms you aren't sure if you're strong or weak.......that in itself makes you sound weak.......

 

[Saint Guinefort]

It is no joke. A masters of theology degree exists. Proof by identity.
Whether he has one or not is irrelevant.

So you are OK with Christians lying in service to God? That's not in accordance with your own faith. I'd give you the chapter and verse but you'd have to read the Bible then.

Claims of degrees, certifications, licenses, experience, or any other means of self or government sanctification mean nothing on blind forums such as JPP.

Obvious lies, however, are hard to hide.

The theology degree is not a proof that any god or gods exist or not.

Well, it indicates that some people who CLAIM to be Christian will lie in order to support their faith. I don't know why someone would do that unless they were a "ravening wolf".

 

[Saint Guinefort]

sure you have......you can't seem to make up your mind whether you deny his existence or if you're simply waiting for proof

^^^^^^THIS RIGHT HERE^^^^^^. This is how I know you DON'T have a Masters in Theology.

.......using your own silly terms you aren't sure if you're strong or weak.......that in itself makes you sound weak.......

They're not "my" terms. But given that you clearly know less than nothing about theology I can understand how you'd make that assumption.

Why are you such a liar? Do you think your God is going to be pleased with you?

 

[Into the Night]

Dipshit: I NEVER CLAIMED TO HAVE A DEGREE IN THEOLOGY. I'm not a massive lying hypocrite like you.

Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Both agnostics and atheists feel the question of any religion being True simply don't need to be answered. The difference I have already explained.

Why don't you sit this one out for once. You don't know what you're talking about. Why not just let adults talk?

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

What the fuck??? Not even close you dimbulb.

With all the internet has to offer you have somehow found a way to carve out a near fractal lack of knowledge in anything. Amazing.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Not shown.

if you've missed it reread my conversation with Cypress.....

May I ask why various MALES present in one are missing in the other?

as stated, they communicate different things to different cultures......do you find that something sinister that threatens your atheism?......

How many different versions of YOUR ancestry do you have?

logically, as many different things as need to be communicated......do you want to know about mom's side or dad's?.....

There are various "explanations" for the differences but they are just guesses and exegeses to make sense of what is far more likely to simply be two different people making up two different stories about the same concept.

so which ones are you making up?

Unless you have a very different version of Christology than everyone else does.

I think its safe to assume I have a different one than atheists have, whether they are strong or weak like yourself.......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

^^^^^^THIS RIGHT HERE^^^^^^. This is how I know you DON'T have a Masters in Theology.

forgive me....I must have gotten my degree before the atheists made their move to change what "atheist" and "agnostic" meant......

by the way, the attempt was unsuccessful.......atheists are still not agnostics.....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Why don't you sit this one out for once. You don't know what you're talking about. Why not just let adults talk?

why pretend you qualify?......

 

[Into the Night]

I gathered that you were a Christian. Clearly you are incapable of discussing any technical details about your supposed "faith", though.

What's to discuss?? You don't believe any of it anyway. You believe in your own religion. I don't demand you discuss the 'technical details', as you put it, about your own religion either. You simply accept your religion on faith, just as I accept my religion on faith.

Good. (Clearly you couldn't if you wanted to, but good for you to know your limits).

But apparently you do not know yours.

Good for you. No one is begrudging you that. I know I certainly don't. But just because you believe in Jesus doesn't mean you necessarily know anything about how your faith came to be.

I know how my faith came to be. I know who the author of it is.

I know a lot of people who couldn't name one Church father or explain the Ontological Argument of Anselm but still fervently believe in Christ.

There is only one Father in Christianity. I don't need to name Him other than that. I also believe in Jesus Christ, His Son. A agree with their teachings put forth in scripture.

I guess it's not necessary to know anything about one's religion but if you want to poke your head into a conversation about it, you might come across as needlessly wasting peoples' time.

I do not waste my time. The only reason that you consider your time wasted is because you believe no god or gods exist. You simply believe in a different religion. You then waste YOUR time trying to prove your religion True.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

you're just another God denier......

Which is more of a denial of God? Saying I'm an atheist or you lying about having a Masters in Theology? I'm genuinely curious.

and apparently a slave to modernism and its "rules" for communication.......

I would LOVE to see your thesis. LOL.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Wrong. An atheist means 'no religion', and is one that has no religion at all. They do not try to claim that any god or gods exist or not. They simply don't go there.

Where do you make this stuff up from? Do you think that just because you imagined something it makes it real? Now you are just making up things about atheism.

An agnostic means 'no god'

NOT EVEN CLOSE. NOT EVEN. Read Huxley.

Like any religion, it is based on some initial circular argument, with arguments extending from that.

You have a vivid imagination.

The other name for the circular argument (not a fallacy, by the way), is the Argument of Faith.

Another word for your posts is "trash".

It is not possible to prove whether any god or gods exist or not. All one can do is present evidence for their position. Evidence is not a proof.

I wholly agree with you on this. There is no way to prove ANYTHING outside of mathematics. Certainly empiricism and science agree that there is no such thing as "proof" of a thing's existence.

And the presence of "evidence" would be nice for a change from your side. But that's hard to come by.