The main issue with Christianity

[Uncensored2008]

I am smarter and more articulate than you.

 

[BidenPresident]

troll

 

[Matt Dillon]

fuck you

Yes! That's inherently more articulate and eclectic than anything I could ever fathom.

Hey, you should quit while you're only slightly behind. Me making you cry real hard is in the pipeline.

I used to try to give Xelor advice on how to communicate to reach a broad audience.

He didn't want to listen to me; But I was telling him things I've known since quite a young age.

Not everybody understands the words of the intelligentsia

If you want regular/the majority of people to understand, one has to communicate in a way that most people can comprehend.

Now, what was that bullshit you were talking?

 

[BidenPresident]

Yes! That's inherently more articulate and eclectic than anything I could ever fathom.

Hey, you should quit while you're only slightly behind. Me making you cry real hard is in the pipeline.

You are an inarticulate buffoon. Back to ignore with you, troll.

 

[Uncensored2008]

fuck you

 

[Matt Dillon]

Bidenpresident, that bastion of sophistication and nuance.



Lord help us all!

 

[IBDaMann]

Evading your question by answering it directly?

You never answered my question. Below, you will EVADE the same question yet again.

That I am not a Christian blows your entire premise out of the water.

Nope. That you are an atheist throws all of your denial right in your face. You lack theism. You are an atheist. You just aren't honest enough with yourself to admit it to yourself.

My words were clear.

Your babbling was only clear to you because you at least knew what you were thinking, albeit failing to express in any coherent manner.

I state that I am not an Atheist because I lack the faith required to be one.

That's what an atheist is, i.e. someone who lacks any faith/theism. You sufficiently lack faith and are thus an atheist.

From that, you declared that I am I Christian.

Would you show me where I wrote that? I have been pointing out that you are an atheist. Where did you get "Christian" out of all that?

I am not - if I had faith in a religion, it would not be Christian.

... but it would be a theism, which would make you a theist, unlike the atheist that you are.

Words have meanings.

Yep. Let's run through a few:

Asymmetrical: lacking symmetry
Apolitical: lacking a political component
Asexual: lacking a sexual component
Amoral: lacking a morality component
Amorphous: lacking form
Atypical: not typical
Anarchic: lacking authority hierarchy
Atheistic: lacking theism
Anomalous: lacking normalcy

Atheism is the absolute belief that there is nothing beyond the natural realm and that there is no possibility of a supernatural reality.

Nope. What you wrote here is a very theistic belief, one that precludes atheism. Atheism simply means "lacking theism."

Agnosticism is the acknowledgment that we don't know whether anything beyond to natural realm exists.

Incorrect. What you just described is properly referred to as "common sense." Agnosticism, on the other hand, is exactly what I said it is, and you courteously confirmed, not a position that one does not know something (because then everybody would suddenly become an agnostic at every realization of something one does not know) but rather is a position that a set of beliefs is not knowable. Let's call up the definition you provided and take another look:


[FONT=DDG_ProximaNova]agnosticism[/FONT]
[FONT=DDG_ProximaNova][FONT=ddg-serp-icons !important]
[/FONT]ăg-nŏs′tĭ-sĭz″əm[/FONT]
[FONT=DDG_ProximaNova][h=3]noun[/h]

1. The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.
2. The belief [position] that the existence or nonexistence of a deity or deities cannot be known with certainty.
3. The doctrines of the agnostics; the doctrine that the ultimate cause and the essential nature of tilings are unknowable, or at least unknown.

[/FONT]

 

[Ross Dolan]

You never answered my question. Below, you will EVADE the same question yet again.


Nope. That you are an atheist throws all of your denial right in your face. You lack theism. You are an atheist. You just aren't honest enough with yourself to admit it to yourself.


Your babbling was only clear to you because you at least knew what you were thinking, albeit failing to express in any coherent manner.


That's what an atheist is, i.e. someone who lacks any faith/theism. You sufficiently lack faith and are thus an atheist.


Would you show me where I wrote that? I have been pointing out that you are an atheist. Where did you get "Christian" out of all that?


... but it would be a theism, which would make you a theist, unlike the atheist that you are.


Yep. Let's run through a few:

Asymmetrical: lacking symmetry
Apolitical: lacking a political component
Asexual: lacking a sexual component
Amoral: lacking a morality component
Amorphous: lacking form
Atypical: not typical
Anarchic: lacking authority hierarchy
Atheistic: lacking theism
Anomalous: lacking normalcy


Nope. What you wrote here is a very theistic belief, one that precludes atheism. Atheism simply means "lacking theism."


Incorrect. What you just described is properly referred to as "common sense." Agnosticism, on the other hand, is exactly what I said it is, and you courteously confirmed, not a position that one does not know something (because then everybody would suddenly become an agnostic at every realization of something one does not know) but rather is a position that a set of beliefs is not knowable. Let's call up the definition you provided and take another look:


[FONT=DDG_ProximaNova]agnosticism[/FONT]
[FONT=DDG_ProximaNova][FONT=ddg-serp-icons !important]
[/FONT]ăg-nŏs′tĭ-sĭz″əm[/FONT]
[FONT=DDG_ProximaNova][h=3]noun[/h]

1. The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.
2. The belief [position] that the existence or nonexistence of a deity or deities cannot be known with certainty.
3. The doctrines of the agnostics; the doctrine that the ultimate cause and the essential nature of tilings are unknowable, or at least unknown.

[/FONT]

Most dictionaries show...MAY BE unknowable.

The assertion, "there are no gods" IS unknowable. To know it one would have to be a GOD.

However, the assertion, "there is at least one GOD" MAY be unknowable. No way to tell if it is unknowable or not.

But if someone says, "I know there is a GOD, because that GOD has revealed itself to me"...it behooves you to ask, "How do you KNOW you are not deluding yourself?"

The answers to that question can be very entertaining.

 

[BidenPresident]

The assertion, "there are no gods" IS unknowable.

Give your proof.

 

[BartenderElite]

That you had to start a thread bashing Christianity (The church that The Son of God Jesus started) speaks as to the quality of your character.

No, you're not smarter or better than God. Deal with it. Atheism has never brought anything beneficial to humanity.

I'm not an atheist, and the OP doesn't bash Christianity.

Other than that, a fine response.

 

[BidenPresident]

I'm not an atheist, and the OP doesn't bash Christianity.

Other than that, a fine response.

Matt is showering you with Christian love.

 

[BartenderElite]

Matt is showering you with Christian love.

I mean, shouldn't Christians on here at least TRY to profess some Christian values and act in a way that honors the tenets professed by that religion?

 

[BidenPresident]

I mean, shouldn't Christians on here at least TRY to profess some Christian values and act in a way that honors the value professed by that religion?

Apparently you don't have to be Christian toward people you do not like.

 

[IBDaMann]

Most dictionaries show...MAY BE unknowable.

Dictionaries do not own the English language and do not define any words. Dictionaries tell one how to spell words, how to pronounce them, and how they are commonly used, to include common misusages. Dictionaries are awash in erroneous usages that are nonetheless common misusages, which is why they are included.

Note: Anyone who mistakenly believes that dictionaries somehow define words needs to explain how three different dictionaries will all have differing "definitions" for the same word(s).

The assertion, "there are no gods" IS unknowable. To know it one would have to be a GOD.

Frank, it's not that simple. You and I could theoretically have a philosophical discussion in which I present my reasons for knowing that there are no gods. There would be plenty of discussion as to what it means to be "knowable" in the first place. In order for us to have any sort of meaningful discussion, we would have to get semantics straight so that we avoid falling into the trap of absolutely nothing being knowable. If I see a book on the table in front of me, can I say that I know that there is a book on the table in front of me, or are we locked into everything being a potential illusion from a Doc Dutch drug-binge spiritual journey and there might not even be a table in front of me? Once we agree to extend "knowable" into a reasonable domain of perceptions and reasoning, I could argue, for example, that the random nature of the observable universe precludes any sort of intelligent creator, and that one can know things through deductive reasoning, not only from direct observations, and that the observable universe shows us all the information we need to deduce the correct answer. You might disagree ... but we would be discussing the matter and the point would remain to be resolved ... until a third person joins the discussion and presents different arguments.

So agnosticism is the position of he who argues that a set of beliefs is unknowable. He who argues that a set of beliefs is knowable is not agnostic on that issue.

However, the assertion, "there is at least one GOD" MAY be unknowable. No way to tell if it is unknowable or not.

Let me jump to the error you are making in all this. Theism and agnosticism are completely independent. Nonetheless, you are trying to link them. Further, you are trying to establish absolute truth values for the knowability of various theistic beliefs. All you are going to accomplish is to state your positions. Therefore, if you are going to go through the trouble of thinking through where you stand on the knowability of various theistic beliefs, you might as well start a thread to allow others to share their positions. Make sure you establish what it means to be knowable, and expect that to be a separate sub-thread running through the thread.

My point is that agnosticism is a position on knowability (of certain beliefs). Agnosticism is not any particular set of beliefs.

But if someone says, "I know there is a GOD, because that GOD has revealed itself to me"...it behooves you to ask, "How do you KNOW you are not deluding yourself?"

Nope. It behooves you to realize that this person's faith/theism holds that his deity has been "revealed" and that he therefore claims to know that his deity exists. The Global Warming faith similarly claims that global warming is the "observed" (revealed) warming of the earth and claims to know that the cause is anthropogenetically altered fruits and vegetables. In both cases, the claim of knowing is part of the faith and is simply what is believed, despite the claim of something being known.

I don't think we need to discuss how the mere claim of something being known does not make it so (Climate Change anyone?). Someone who claims to know something per his faith is making a theistic profession, not a statement of absolute truth.

 

[BidenPresident]

Dictionaries do not own the English language and do not define any words.

No one can take you seriously for saying such absurd things, Into the Night.

 

[IBDaMann]

No one can take you seriously for saying such absurd things, Into the Night.

Nobody takes you seriously at present.

 

[IBDaMann]

I mean, shouldn't Christians on here at least TRY to profess some Christian values and act in a way that honors the tenets professed by that religion?

By their own faith, no Christian is a perfect Christian. Nonetheless, there are Christians on this board who practice Christian values to the extent that Christian values can be "practiced" on an anonymous message board.

 

[IBDaMann]

Atheism has never brought anything beneficial to humanity.

The atheism of science and math and logic makes them possible, otherwise they would not exist and all we would have is unfalsifiability. We also wouldn't have the scientific method, engineering, technology, architecture, or any of the great things that emerged from atheistic functional systems

Atheism is not a dirty word. I highly recommend you learn what it means, i.e. devoid of theism, and what it does not mean, e.g. theistic professions, afronts to God, etc ...

 

[BidenPresident]

Nobody takes you seriously at present.

They do. You think a dictionary does not define words. Hard to imagine anything dumber than that.

 

[IBDaMann]

They do. You think a dictionary does not define words. Hard to imagine anything dumber than that.

It's hard for you to imagine anything. There's no delicate way to put this. You're stupid. All people who have seen your posts know this. They are not laughing with you.