The bible

[Mason Michaels]

My position is the same as most of world Christianity.

The vast majority of chirstians do not have the hubris you do.

The divine is unfathomable to the human mind, and the mystery of the infinite cannot be captured adequately by the limits of human language. Stories written by humans have to account for that.

That why most of world Christianity believes your ultra literalist take on the bible is the height of hubris.

The vast majority of Christians aren't!
But thanks for admitting you're a sheep following the herd!

 

[Mason Michaels]

My position is the same as most of world Christianity.

The vast majority of chirstians do not have the hubris you do.

The divine is unfathomable to the human mind, and the mystery of the infinite cannot be captured adequately by the limits of human language. Stories written by humans have to account for that.

That why most of world Christianity believes your ultra literalist take on the bible is the height of hubris.

No one who doesn't believe Jesus is the Son of God is a Christian. Doesn't matter what they think.

 

[gfm7175]

You do not know squat in your heart.

It's a saying, dude.

All your heart does is pump blood.

Incorrect. The heart has multiple functions; pumping blood is but one of them.

Your brain is where the thinking and knowing take place...

Is it?

AND YOU DO NOT KNOW ANY GODS EXIST.

I "know it in my heart", even though I cannot prove it to be true.

You are BLINDLY GUESSING there is one...

No, I'm not. I have all sorts of evidence to support my belief.

and like a typical two year-old, you are insisting your blind guess is correct.

Why are you insulting two year old children?

Pray to a brick wall.

No. A brick wall is not my god.

It will hear and answer your prayers also...

No it won't. Inanimate objects cannot hear or answer anything.

if you demand that it is so.

One can say or believe anything that one wishes to say or believe. There are even a bunch of twits out there who believe that the naturally occurring CO2 gas is somehow catastrophically increasing Earth's temperature. They "demand that it is so", so of course some twit could claim that a brick wall will hear and answer prayers, just like he could also claim that CO2 is catastrophically increasing Earth's temperature.

You do not KNOW anything by faith. You are blindly guessing that your god exists.

No problemo. Guess away.

Again, not a "blind guess". There is evidence for it.

Your "faith" is just your insistence that your blind guess about a god existing...is correct.

RAAA. (repetitive assertion already addressed)

Sounds as though you would drop to the floor and kick your heels if corrected.

Also cute.



Pure blind guesses!


More to come.

RAAA.

 

[Ross Dolan]

It's a saying, dude.

Well, be original. Say, "I know it in my kidneys."

It would make about as much sense in the context of what we are discussing.

Saying that you know something in your heart or kidneys IS SAYING THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW IT.

Incorrect. The heart has multiple functions; pumping blood is but one of them.

Name them.

Is it?

Yup.

I "know it in my heart", even though I cannot prove it to be true.

You do not "know" anything in your heart...or your kidneys or lungs. Saying that you know it in your heart is acknowledging that you DO NOT KNOW it.

No, I'm not. I have all sorts of evidence to support my belief.

Horse shit. You have no more evidence to support your "belief" than an atheist who asserts "there are no gods" has to support his.

Why are you insulting two year old children?

You are right. Comparing your ravings to those of a two year-old child is insulting to those children.

Jesus H. Christ. You are totally incompetent.

No. A brick wall is not my god.

Okay.

No it won't. Inanimate objects cannot hear or answer anything.

That was my point, Moron.

One can say or believe anything that one wishes to say or believe. There are even a bunch of twits out there who believe that the naturally occurring CO2 gas is somehow catastrophically increasing Earth's temperature. They "demand that it is so", so of course some twit could claim that a brick wall will hear and answer prayers, just like he could also claim that CO2 is catastrophically increasing Earth's temperature.

Yes, one can "believe" anything one wants. But a "belief that a god exists" or "a belief that no gods exist" is nothing but a blind guess...and anyone who insists their blind guess is correct, is playing with himself.

Again, not a "blind guess". There is evidence for it.

It is a blind guess...just like the blind guess, "There are no gods."

RAAA. (repetitive assertion already addressed)

Yes, that is what you keep doing. Asserting you know something you do not know.

No problem. I tolerate that bullshit better than most.

RAAA.

Yup. See comment above.

 

[gfm7175]

So you blindly guess that the Bible is the inerrant word of god.

Nothing wrong with that. You are allowed to guess.




Nothing but a blind guess.

RAAA.

I do speak for myself.

You attempted to speak for me as well.

You are an ass kisser...and you are now kissing Jesus' ass...in hopes that you have eternal life.

Whew. What a waste of eternal life that would be.

If you wish to view my being thankful towards Jesus (for performing the greatest act of love that anyone could possibly perform by taking my place on the cross and saving me from my sins) as "ass kissing", then so be it.

Yup. You worship a god who essentially says, "I will forgive you for doing things that offend me, but first you must torture and kill my son."

God never said that.

If that god were a human...he would be in an institution under conditions of greater security than those imposed on Hannibal Lecter.

I can "one up" that thought of yours. That God has in fact already taken on human flesh, being born of a virgin, and has already been crucified on the cross (which is a harsh form of the death penalty, worse than being institutionalized) for the accused crime of "blasphemy" (from the Sanhedrin point of view).

So what you are saying here is that you cannot answer the question...or realize the intellectual risk of doing so.

Okay. So you are chicken. Not your worst quality by a long shot.

I've already answered it.

Yeah, just as it is obvious to you that your god exists!

I have read Romans...and just about all of the epistles of Paul. I used to think Paul was a jerkoff, but have changed my mind about him. He just disagreed with Jesus on some things...and decided to change them.

He succeeded.

I do not believe that you have read Romans. You show no understanding of it.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

God never said that.

But that is effectively what went down, correct? God decided that mankind needed to be atoned to Him so He manifested Himself as His only begotten son so that He might come to earth to act as the "Sacraficial Lamb" for all of mankind's sins.

Wasn't Christ's sacrifice absolutely and utterly necessary? And as such deemed so by God.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Only those of little faith will not believe the scriptures when they say that God loses none of us perfect souls.

You are calling your God incompetent at creating perfection.

You might be right given the abominations he creates.

I can see why your faith fails you.

That creator is not perfect by any means. Right?

Regards
DL

what does God's perfection have to do with your choice of disobedience?.....

 

[Ross Dolan]

RAAA.

Yes. Why don't you stop doing it.

You attempted to speak for me as well.

Never. If you think correcting your mistake (or lie) is speaking for you...you are wrong.

If you wish to view my being thankful towards Jesus (for performing the greatest act of love that anyone could possibly perform by taking my place on the cross and saving me from my sins) as "ass kissing", then so be it.

Okay...we agree there.

God never said that.

It appears as though the Christians of the world suppose it was inferred. Otherwise, why make such a big thing of Jesus being executed?

I can "one up" that thought of yours. That God has in fact already taken on human flesh, being born of a virgin, and has already been crucified on the cross (which is a harsh form of the death penalty, worse than being institutionalized) for the accused crime of "blasphemy" (from the Sanhedrin point of view).

Okay...that is what you and others blindly guess to be the case.

My comment was a hypothetical. If the god were a human who required that his son be tortured and put to death before "forgiving" an insult, he would be institutionalized. Unless he did it in Texas...and then he would be executed.

I've already answered it.

You haven't...and I suspect you won't ever do so. You are chicken.

I do not believe that you have read Romans. You show no understanding of it.

That is the problem with "beliefs." They can be dead wrong. And this "belief" you have that I have not read Romans is dead wrong. Actually, I have read the entirety of the New Testament...INCLUDING ROMANS.

Here is a bibliography of the Bibles (and other religious books) currently on the book shelves in front of me.

St. Joseph Edition of The New American Bible; Catholic book Publishing, NY; 1968 (Catholic)

The New American Bible; Thomas Nelson Inc, Nashville; 1971 (Catholic)

The Holy Bible King James Version; Thomas Nelson, Nashville: 1984 (Protestant)

The Holy Bible New International Version; Zondervan Bible Pub. Grand Rapids; 1978 (Non-demoninational)

The Scofield Reference Holy Bible (King James Version); Oxford Univ. Press; NY; 1909 (Protestant)

The Holy Scriptures Masoretic Text; Jewish Publ Society; Philadelphia: 1955 (Jewish)

The Holy Bible, St.Joseph Textbook Edition, Confraternity Version; Catholic book Publ: NY; 1963; (Catholic)

The Holy Bible Revised Berkeley Version; The Gideons Intrl; 1984; (Non-denominational Protestant)

The New American Catholic Edition of The Holy Bible; Benziger Bros, Boston; 1950 (Catholic)

The Old Testament; Guild Press NY; 1965 (Catholic)

The Living Bible; Holman Illustrated Edition: A.J. Holman Co; Philadelphia; 1973 (Protestant)

The Holy Bible; King James Version; The World Publ Co: Cleveland; (no date); (Protestant)

The Old Testament; Hebrew Publishing Co: NY; 1916 (English & Hebrew) (Jewish)

**** Also I use

The Common Catechism of the Christian Faith: Seabury Press;NY 1975 (Protestant)

Catechism of the Catholic Church: Libreria Editrice Vaticana; Urbi et Orbi Comm; 1994 (Catholic)

The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism: Catholic Book Publish; NY; 1962 (Catholic)

*****Plus, I have (estimated) 40 - 50 other books dealing with the Bible, religion, and philosophy that I use when posting.

 

[gfm7175]

Well, be original. Say, "I know it in my kidneys."

It would make about as much sense in the context of what we are discussing.

Saying that you know something in your heart or kidneys IS SAYING THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW IT.

RAAA.

Name them.

For starters, the heart also controls the rhythm and speed of one's heart rate. It also maintains one's blood pressure.

Yup.

You sure?

You do not "know" anything in your heart...or your kidneys or lungs. Saying that you know it in your heart is acknowledging that you DO NOT KNOW it.

RAAA.

Horse shit. You have no more evidence to support your "belief" than an atheist who asserts "there are no gods" has to support his.

I have plenty of evidence to support my belief. So does the Church of No God member to support his.

You are right. Comparing your ravings to those of a two year-old child is insulting to those children.

Jesus H. Christ. You are totally incompetent.

The ravings belong to you, dude.

Yes, one can "believe" anything one wants. But a "belief that a god exists" or "a belief that no gods exist" is nothing but a blind guess...and anyone who insists their blind guess is correct, is playing with himself.

No it isn't. There is evidence for both beliefs.

Would you likewise consider the "belief that the Earth is 4.543 billion years old" to be a blind guess?

It is a blind guess...just like the blind guess, "There are no gods."

RAAA.

Yes, that is what you keep doing. Asserting you know something you do not know.

No problem. I tolerate that bullshit better than most.

Yup. See comment above.

RAAA.

 

[gfm7175]

Actually, I have read the entirety of the New Testament...INCLUDING ROMANS.

You are now in paradox:

[1] I have read the entirety of the New Testament.
[2] I have read Romans...and just about all of the epistles of Paul.

You've either read the entirety of the New Testament or you haven't. Which one is it? You've obviously lost track of your lies at this point.

Here is a bibliography of the Bibles (and other religious books) currently on the book shelves in front of me.

St. Joseph Edition of The New American Bible; Catholic book Publishing, NY; 1968 (Catholic)

The New American Bible; Thomas Nelson Inc, Nashville; 1971 (Catholic)

The Holy Bible King James Version; Thomas Nelson, Nashville: 1984 (Protestant)

The Holy Bible New International Version; Zondervan Bible Pub. Grand Rapids; 1978 (Non-demoninational)

The Scofield Reference Holy Bible (King James Version); Oxford Univ. Press; NY; 1909 (Protestant)

The Holy Scriptures Masoretic Text; Jewish Publ Society; Philadelphia: 1955 (Jewish)

The Holy Bible, St.Joseph Textbook Edition, Confraternity Version; Catholic book Publ: NY; 1963; (Catholic)

The Holy Bible Revised Berkeley Version; The Gideons Intrl; 1984; (Non-denominational Protestant)

The New American Catholic Edition of The Holy Bible; Benziger Bros, Boston; 1950 (Catholic)

The Old Testament; Guild Press NY; 1965 (Catholic)

The Living Bible; Holman Illustrated Edition: A.J. Holman Co; Philadelphia; 1973 (Protestant)

The Holy Bible; King James Version; The World Publ Co: Cleveland; (no date); (Protestant)

The Old Testament; Hebrew Publishing Co: NY; 1916 (English & Hebrew) (Jewish)

**** Also I use

The Common Catechism of the Christian Faith: Seabury Press;NY 1975 (Protestant)

Catechism of the Catholic Church: Libreria Editrice Vaticana; Urbi et Orbi Comm; 1994 (Catholic)

The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism: Catholic Book Publish; NY; 1962 (Catholic)

*****Plus, I have (estimated) 40 - 50 other books dealing with the Bible, religion, and philosophy that I use when posting.

I don't believe you, and even if you did, it's irrelevant. Having books in front of you is not reading and comprehending them.

 

[gfm7175]

But that is effectively what went down, correct?

Yes, those events happened, but God never told anyone to kill Jesus. They did so on their own accord.

God decided that mankind needed to be atoned to Him so He manifested Himself as His only begotten son so that He might come to earth to act as the "Sacraficial Lamb" for all of mankind's sins.

Right.

Wasn't Christ's sacrifice absolutely and utterly necessary? And as such deemed so by God.

Yes, it was absolutely necessary. In the Old Testament, Abraham spared his son because there was a ram in the thicket to act as a substitute. In the New Testament, God did not spare Jesus because Jesus WAS that ram, Jesus WAS that substitute for US. WE were spared. What an act of love!

 

[Mason Michaels]

You are now in paradox:

[1] I have read the entirety of the New Testament.
[2] I have read Romans...and just about all of the epistles of Paul.

You've either read the entirety of the New Testament or you haven't. Which one is it? You've obviously lost track of your lies at this point.


I don't believe you, and even if you did, it's irrelevant. Having books in front of you is not reading and comprehending them.

You should read the old testament first! Before the new testament!
There's still old testament prophecies to be fulfilled

 

[Mason Michaels]

Yes, those events happened, but God never told anyone to kill Jesus. They did so on their own accord.


Right.


Yes, it was absolutely necessary. In the Old Testament, Abraham spared his son because there was a ram in the thicket to act as a substitute. In the New Testament, God did not spare Jesus because Jesus WAS that ram, Jesus WAS that substitute for US. WE were spared. What an act of love!

Jesus became the Passover Lamb

 

[gfm7175]

Jesus became the Passover Lamb

... and he did so on his own accord.

 

[Mason Michaels]

... and he did so on his own accord.

Absolutely! Next comes the Passover Angel at the judgement

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Yes, those events happened, but God never told anyone to kill Jesus. They did so on their own accord.

This is a philosophically tricky area. You can't "blame" humans for sacrificing Jesus if that is how man is atone to God.

If humans CHOSE to sacrifice Jesus then that means you must believe there is an alternate route to salvation.

 

[Ross Dolan]

RAAA.

Yes, you really ought to stop doing that...and acknowledge when you are unable to make a coherent rebuttal.

For starters, the heart also controls the rhythm and speed of one's heart rate. It also maintains one's blood pressure.

The heart pumps blood. Period. The rhythm and speed are functions of the pump. It doesn't maintain one's blood pressure. That function belongs to the carotid arteries.

You sure?

Yup.

RAAA.

You really have to stop doing it. And you do not have to remind me that you are doing it. I can easily see it.

I have plenty of evidence to support my belief. So does the Church of No God member to support his.

There is plenty of evidence for both sides...but none of it supports either side.

You blindly guess there is a god...and you blindly guess various traits for the god.

So...you are free to blindly guess about anything. Denying that you are blindly guessing is fun to watch. It is so cute...especially the way you do it.

The ravings belong to you, dude.

You are the one who said I am insulting 2 year-olds by comparing you to them. I agreed with you. That is not raving...that is just me acknowledging the stupidity of your comment.

No it isn't. There is evidence for both beliefs.

BOTTOM LINE: People who assert there is a god...and people who assert there are no gods...are just blindly guessing. All the rest (what you foolishly consider evidence for one side or the other) is just ambiguity.

Would you likewise consider the "belief that the Earth is 4.543 billion years old" to be a blind guess?

I suppose the estimate of between 4 and 5 billion years old to be the best scientists of this period of our existence can make using the evidence they have. It is an estimate that may be revised as science advances.

RAAA.

Yup. Stop doing it.

RAAA.

See above.

 

[Ross Dolan]

You are now in paradox:

[1] I have read the entirety of the New Testament.
[2] I have read Romans...and just about all of the epistles of Paul.

You've either read the entirety of the New Testament or you haven't. Which one is it? You've obviously lost track of your lies at this point.

I have read the entirety of the New Testament...and I have read Romans. I have also read Mark. I have also read Acts.

Only a fool would think there is some kind of paradox there.

Oh, wait...of course you would think there is.

I don't believe you, and even if you did, it's irrelevant. Having books in front of you is not reading and comprehending them.

You are so cute when you disagree. I'd bet the other kids in the sandbox think you are hot shit.

I do agree...having books and reading an comprehending them are NOT the same thing.

But I have read them...and I do comprehend them...as much as they can be comprehended.

 

[Ross Dolan]

This is a philosophically tricky area. You can't "blame" humans for sacrificing Jesus if that is how man is atone to God.

If humans CHOSE to sacrifice Jesus then that means you must believe there is an alternate route to salvation.

Yes, indeed.

And whether Jesus did it as a choice or not...JESUS APPARENTLY THOUGHT HIS TORTURE AND DEATH WERE NECESSARY FOR THE SALVATION OF SOULS.

That is what this asshole is arguing anyway. He is insisting that Jesus died to save him. Well, Jesus definitely thought it was necessary for him to be tortured and killed in order to do that.

 

[gfm7175]

This is a philosophically tricky area. You can't "blame" humans for sacrificing Jesus if that is how man is atone to God.

They painfully executed an innocent man, dude. That's wrong of them to do, even if it does happen to work out according to God's ultimate plan to redeem mankind.

If humans CHOSE to sacrifice Jesus then that means you must believe there is an alternate route to salvation.

No, it doesn't. It just means that I believe free will exists. Those humans made that choice on their own accord, however that choice happened to fit perfectly into God's ultimate plan to redeem mankind.