Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: Ricky Spanish on June 27, 2015, 10:05:10 AM
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Where in the Bible does Jesus say he hates homosexuals etc? ::) He could well have been gay himself!
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Atheists, obviously.
-
Fig trees.
-
Fig trees.
We have a fig tree in our garden, it is producing figs, and looks very healthy in spite of Jesus cursing them! ;D
-
Pigs.
-
People inviting him to parties and then saying, "Oh no, Jesus, we forgot to get any wine..."
-
People inviting him to parties and then saying, "Oh no, Jesus, we forgot to get any wine..."
It was useful he liked it so much that he had plenty to hand to get them all legless! ;D
-
People inviting him to parties and then saying, "Oh no, Jesus, we forgot to get any wine..."
In future. please don't post this sort of thing when I'm in the middle of drinking a cup of coffee. I'm sending you the bill for coffee stains all over my laptop!
Thank you.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
If I were in Gods position, I would get really cheesed off with people who assume that they know what offends me.
-
There is what its believers regard as 'evidence' for Jesus hating pigs, however.
-
Same old chestnut comments, from all the old, tired posters, even though the incidents have been explained many times, by me alone. Still, when you're an obsessive, you have to cling to any stupid things you can to keep up the sad on-going puerility.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
If I were in Gods position, I would get really cheesed off with people who assume that they know what offends me.
You never know the old boy might find us wicked heathen much more to its taste than those humourless, extreme, preachy Christians who think they are in its club! ;D
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
If I were in Gods position, I would get really cheesed off with people who assume that they know what offends me.
You never know the old boy might find us wicked heathen much more to its taste than those humourless, extreme, preachy Christians who think they are in its club! ;D
There is no one more irritating than the 'Smart Arse' who has all the answers - so presumably God had a fairly low opinion of all those 'Know it all' fundamentalists that we encounter from time to time.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
If I were in Gods position, I would get really cheesed off with people who assume that they know what offends me.
You never know the old boy might find us wicked heathen much more to its taste than those humourless, extreme, preachy Christians who think they are in its club! ;D
There is no one more irritating than the 'Smart Arse' who has all the answers - so presumably God had a fairly low opinion of all those 'Know it all' fundamentalists that we encounter from time to time.
If the deity exists and isn't as unpleasant as the Bible gives the impression it is, I reckon it might not be too thrilled with Christians who put others off the faith, like one or two do on this forum!
One in particular is always slagging off us wicked non believers, but is apparently in total denial about their own unpleasant behaviour and doing exactly what they are accusing others of doing! I am on the verge of losing it with them completely and telling them in no uncertain terms exactly what I think of their disgusting behaviour. However, if I do I will have to fork out another £100 to charity, which I promised to do if I really went OTT where they are concerned. As I have had quite an expensive month, I would sooner not have to spend anymore at present!
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
If I were in Gods position, I would get really cheesed off with people who assume that they know what offends me.
There's an awful lot of it on this forum. Quite a few know that 'God is against gay marriage'.
-
There's an awful lot of it on this forum. Quite a few know that 'God is against gay marriage'.
Are you saying that you know that he isn't, Rhi?
The problem with a lot of Jesus' teachings is that very few of them lay down any sort of 'legal' position; rather, they are principles and Christians are meant to use their God-given minds to apply them to specific issues that they encounter. I realise that, for some here, this lack of the 'Thou shalt/shalt not' kind of position on a number of issues is unnerving, since they don't like using their God-given brains in this way. However, that's their look-out not mine or any other person's - Christian or not.
-
There's an awful lot of it on this forum. Quite a few know that 'God is against gay marriage'.
Are you saying that you know that he isn't, Rhi?
Negative proof fallacy.
-
There's an awful lot of it on this forum. Quite a few know that 'God is against gay marriage'.
Are you saying that you know that he isn't, Rhi?
Negative proof fallacy.
Sorry, Shaker; I'd forgotten that you have a problem with your recorded messages getting stuck. I was just asking Rhi whether she had any Biblical references that indicate - when taken in conjunction with other Biblical references - that gay marriage is acceptable to God. Perhaps you would care to answer on her behalf, since you have decided to field that particular point?
-
Not a problem at all. If somebody invokes some named example of lazy, sloppy, fallacious thinking, as you did, I point it out, as I just have, in fact. The only problem here is that some people don't seem to know that they're doing it and keep doing it. That's sad.
Any chance of an answer as to why yesterday's SCOTUS decision with regard to equal marriage throught the US was "questionable" as good news? I asked on the pertinent thread but you appear not to have seen it yet.
God is as irrelevant to equal marriage as it is to everything else. You purport to believe in this crap, you're the one who has to raid your book to find this or that passage for or against. It's irrelevant. The rest of us think about real things that actually exist - like people - and real things that actually matter, like their happiness, and make decisions and take positions on that basis.
-
Not a problem at all. If somebody invokes some named example of lazy, sloppy, fallacious thinking, as you did, I point it out, as I just have, in fact. The only problem here is that some people don't seem to know that they're doing it and keep doing it. That's sad.
It is, isn't it, Shaker. I'll keep praying that you manage to break the habit ;)
-
The habit of pointing out when people are invoking fallacies? No, that's a habit I'd rather keep; in the long run the credulous, the superstitious and the plain old hard of thinking might finally catch up and we'd all have a higher level of discussion.
-
The habit of pointing out when people are invoking fallacies? No, that's a habit I'd rather keep; in the long run the credulous, the superstitious and the plain old hard of thinking might finally catch up and we'd all have a higher level of discussion.
I think there are a few atheists and theists having that higher level of discussion whereas someone like yourself seems to enjoy a low knockabout slanging.
-
The habit of pointing out when people are invoking fallacies? No, that's a habit I'd rather keep; in the long run the credulous, the superstitious and the plain old hard of thinking might finally catch up and we'd all have a higher level of discussion.
I think there are a few atheists and theists having that higher level of discussion whereas someone like yourself seems to enjoy a low knockabout slanging.
I can multitask, and am quite happy in either capacity. On the whole I tend to reply in kind, so that if somebody expresses themselves well and demonstrates themselves to be obviously capable of an intelligent and thoughtful discussion, they can expect the same from me.
The constant assertion merchants and consistent fallacy peddlers on the other hand hand are just chew toys suitable for five minutes' amusement now and again.
-
The habit of pointing out when people are invoking fallacies? No, that's a habit I'd rather keep; in the long run the credulous, the superstitious and the plain old hard of thinking might finally catch up and we'd all have a higher level of discussion.
I think there are a few atheists and theists having that higher level of discussion whereas someone like yourself seems to enjoy a low knockabout slanging.
I can multitask
Brilliant......you da man!
-
Not a problem at all. If somebody invokes some named example of lazy, sloppy, fallacious thinking, as you did, I point it out, as I just have, in fact. The only problem here is that some people don't seem to know that they're doing it and keep doing it. That's sad.
It is, isn't it, Shaker. I'll keep praying that you manage to break the habit ;)
Sorry, Shaker, I obviously misled you. I was actually referring to your comment "If somebody invokes some named example of lazy, sloppy, fallacious thinking, ... , I point it out". You seem to think that I do this, whilst not appreciating that your post does exactly that.
The habit of pointing out when people are invoking fallacies? No, that's a habit I'd rather keep; in the long run the credulous, the superstitious and the plain old hard of thinking might finally catch up and we'd all have a higher level of discussion.
Well, I look forward to seeing you catch up, but it may well take some time if your posts are anything to go by.
I can multitask, and am quite happy in either capacity. On the whole I tend to reply in kind, so that if somebody expresses themselves well and demonstrates themselves to be obviously capable of an intelligent and thoughtful discussion, they can expect the same from me.
The constant assertion merchants and consistent fallacy peddlers on the other hand hand are just chew toys suitable for five minutes' amusement now and again.
You seem to forget that you fit into the category yourself, Shaker. Others here don't seem to dismiss you in quite the same way.
-
Sorry, Shaker, I obviously misled you. I was actually referring to your comment "If somebody invokes some named example of lazy, sloppy, fallacious thinking, ... , I point it out". You seem to think that I do this
Often, the most recent occasion being your deployment of the negative proof fallacy (also known as the argument from ignorance or appeal to ignorance) in #16 at 6:51pm.
whilst not appreciating that your post does exactly that.
Explain how.
Well, I look forward to seeing you catch up, but it may well take some time if your posts are anything to go by.
No, you misunderstand (unsurprisingly): I was referring to the credulous, the superstitious and the plain old hard of thinking.
You seem to forget that you fit into the category yourself, Shaker.
Once again, explain how instead of merely asserting. If you're able.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
-
The habit of pointing out when people are invoking fallacies? No, that's a habit I'd rather keep; in the long run the credulous, the superstitious and the plain old hard of thinking might finally catch up and we'd all have a higher level of discussion.
I think there are a few atheists and theists having that higher level of discussion whereas someone like yourself seems to enjoy a low knockabout slanging.
I can multitask, and am quite happy in either capacity. On the whole I tend to reply in kind, so that if somebody expresses themselves well and demonstrates themselves to be obviously capable of an intelligent and thoughtful discussion, they can expect the same from me.
The constant assertion merchants and consistent fallacy peddlers on the other hand hand are just chew toys suitable for five minutes' amusement now and again.
I don't think so!
-
... a sentence precisely one word too long.
-
There's an awful lot of it on this forum. Quite a few know that 'God is against gay marriage'.
Are you saying that you know that he isn't, Rhi?
The problem with a lot of Jesus' teachings is that very few of them lay down any sort of 'legal' position; rather, they are principles and Christians are meant to use their God-given minds to apply them to specific issues that they encounter. I realise that, for some here, this lack of the 'Thou shalt/shalt not' kind of position on a number of issues is unnerving, since they don't like using their God-given brains in this way. However, that's their look-out not mine or any other person's - Christian or not.
In view of the fact that a great number (a majority?) of Christians find it impossible to obey even the 'Thou shalt/shalt not' rules that are spelt out the proposition of them using their 'God given brains' to any useful effect is questionable.
-
There's an awful lot of it on this forum. Quite a few know that 'God is against gay marriage'.
Are you saying that you know that he isn't, Rhi?
The problem with a lot of Jesus' teachings is that very few of them lay down any sort of 'legal' position; rather, they are principles and Christians are meant to use their God-given minds to apply them to specific issues that they encounter. I realise that, for some here, this lack of the 'Thou shalt/shalt not' kind of position on a number of issues is unnerving, since they don't like using their God-given brains in this way. However, that's their look-out not mine or any other person's - Christian or not.
If some Christians have 'god given ' brains it proves the deity is all that is evil! :o
-
... a sentence precisely one word too long.
;D ;D ;D
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
-
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Yes, we do, Floo. The documentary evidence - namely the Gospels and other New Testament material - makes it very clear that that is what Jesus taught. Since Jesus is God, then rationally and logically we can say that God taught that he hates sin, but loves sinners, even though it wasn't put into that particular form until St Augustine wrote that form of words in his Letter #211, which was written in about 422AD.
-
If some Christians have 'god given ' brains it proves the deity is all that is evil! :o
The same could be said about non-Christians with 'god-given' brains, I suppose, Floo. ;) Do you fit into that category, perhaps? ;D
-
If some Christians have 'god given ' brains it proves the deity is all that is evil! :o
The same could be said about non-Christians with 'god-given' brains, I suppose, Floo. ;) Do you fit into that category, perhaps? ;D
I am a 'wicked heathen' and proud to be so! ;D However, I do my best to help others along the way. Even though I fall well short of perfection, at least I haven't perpetrated the evil deeds attributed to the Biblical deity!
-
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Yes, we do, Floo. The documentary evidence - namely the Gospels and other New Testament material - makes it very clear that that is what Jesus taught. Since Jesus is God, then rationally and logically we can say that God taught that he hates sin, but loves sinners, even though it wasn't put into that particular form until St Augustine wrote that form of words in his Letter #211, which was written in about 422AD.
So it took over 400 years to work out what your god was actually saying? Are you absolutely sure that Augustine got it right?
-
Since Jesus is God
Ah, I see you're in charge of Alan Burns's assertion mill today. Good stuff.
-
If some Christians have 'god given ' brains it proves the deity is all that is evil! :o
If some Christians have "God-given" brains it's hardly a ringing endorsement of their chosen brand of deity.
-
Since Jesus is God
Ah, I see you're in charge of Alan Burns's assertion mill today. Good stuff.
S'funny I never see you picking fellow atheists up on assertion.
Is this assertion business ''Duty shite of the day;:: today?
-
S'funny I never see you picking fellow atheists up on assertion.
I don't often see such stupid claims laid down as fact without any supporting evidence whatever. Most of the atheists here - I'm thinking especially of JeremyP; Professor Davey; torridon and so forth - are much more careful thinkers and therefore writers than that.
-
HB it is the assertions made by some Christians, without the slightest bit of evidence to back them up, that have to be challenged. Unbelief must always be the default position until verifiable proof is put forward.
-
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Yes, we do, Floo. The documentary evidence - namely the Gospels and other New Testament material - makes it very clear that that is what Jesus taught. Since Jesus is God, then rationally and logically we can say that God taught that he hates sin, but loves sinners, even though it wasn't put into that particular form until St Augustine wrote that form of words in his Letter #211, which was written in about 422AD.
And this is your evidence Hope?
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
ippy
-
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Yes, we do, Floo. The documentary evidence - namely the Gospels and other New Testament material - makes it very clear that that is what Jesus taught. Since Jesus is God, then rationally and logically we can say that God taught that he hates sin, but loves sinners, even though it wasn't put into that particular form until St Augustine wrote that form of words in his Letter #211, which was written in about 422AD.
And this is your evidence Hope?
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
ippy
Hysterical, again!!
-
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Yes, we do, Floo. The documentary evidence - namely the Gospels and other New Testament material - makes it very clear that that is what Jesus taught. Since Jesus is God, then rationally and logically we can say that God taught that he hates sin, but loves sinners, even though it wasn't put into that particular form until St Augustine wrote that form of words in his Letter #211, which was written in about 422AD.
And this is your evidence Hope?
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
ippy
Hysterical, again!!
It's good to see you're thinking the same as me for once B A.
Hope really thinks he has verifiable evidence for all of his stuff, looks like he's slipped up on that post
ippy
-
Hope is in 'LA LA' land just like anyone else who suggests they have evidence to support the existence of the deity etc!
-
Hope is in 'LA LA' land just like anyone else who suggests they have evidence to support the existence of the deity etc!
No more than those who suggest that the lack of scientific evidence - as opposed to evidence as a whole - are in any better position to judge.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
So what was going through God's 'mind' when he so easily destroyed the earth in Noah & The Ark story?????
AAHHH They're only pawns in a massive chess game I'm playing solo ?????
-
Hope is in 'LA LA' land just like anyone else who suggests they have evidence to support the existence of the deity etc!
No more than those who suggest that the lack of scientific evidence - as opposed to evidence as a whole - are in any better position to judge.
Looks like you've fully exposed yourself Hope, we're all waiting now; oh, for this evidence of yours.
ippy
-
author=Shaker link=topic=10523.msg533543#msg533543 date=1435467486]
... a sentence precisely one word too long.
Correct. Should have been: "I think." Try it sometime!!
-
Looks like you've fully exposed yourself Hope, we're all waiting now; oh, for this evidence of yours.
No, I haven't exposed myself at all. All you've done is confirm - yet again - just how one-dimensional you are. For me, life is far more than just science. Its about reality, which includes science but isn't exclusively science.
-
So what was going through God's 'mind' when he so easily destroyed the earth in Noah & The Ark story?????
AAHHH They're only pawns in a massive chess game I'm playing solo ?????
You need to ask a different question, Nick. Since that particular story comes in a part of he Bible that is increasingly regarded as theological treatise rather than historical record, you need to ask what the theological purpose of the story was.
-
Hope is in 'LA LA' land just like anyone else who suggests they have evidence to support the existence of the deity etc!
No more than those who suggest that the lack of scientific evidence - as opposed to evidence as a whole - are in any better position to judge.
Give us some of this fabled "evidence as a whole".
We both know you don't have it, so forget about the usual charade you pull where you claim to have presented it already.
Actually, do you even know what evidence is?
-
Looks like you've fully exposed yourself Hope, we're all waiting now; oh, for this evidence of yours.
No, I haven't exposed myself at all. All you've done is confirm - yet again - just how one-dimensional you are. For me, life is far more than just science. Its about reality, which includes science but isn't exclusively science.
Might be a good time to stop digging.
ippy
-
I believe that Hope really thinks he has verifiable evidence for all of his stuff, looks like he's slipped up on that post
ippy
FIFY, ippy. As I and others have regularly pointed out, with life being so much more mere science (amazing and instructive though that element of it is), I don't profess to have, nor need evidence that only answers to science. It is the likes of yourself who are so hung up on the primacy of science that you have blinded yourself to the majestic nature of reality.
Since you, along with Shaker, seem to have a problem with a stuck record, I won't hold your failure to understand that reality against you. I'll just keeping praying that some time the record gets shaken loose and that the scales on your mental and spiritual faculties go the same way.
Might be a good time to stop digging.
I enjoy trying to help people get out of difficulties, and sometimes digging plays its part, ippy. Try it.
-
Give us some of this fabled "evidence as a whole".
Actually, do you even know what evidence is?
To answer your second question first; yes I do. The Oxford Dictionary defines it as The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:
.
As you will notice, this definition doesn't require 'evidence' to fulfill scientific requirements, suggesting that those who believe that it does are the ones who don't understand the term in its totality.
Consequently, some of the 'fabled evidence' you like to deride consists of documentary evidence which you can decide to believe or not; experience - both personal and communal; perhaps even medical - after all, those who don't believe in miracles believe in something equally illogical/irrational, spontaneous healing - something for which there is never any so-called 'scientific' evidence other than the existence of a person who has been healed from a condition that medical science has no answer to.
-
Since you, along with Shaker, seem to have a problem with a stuck record
... a stuck record, on the strength of some recent posts, presumably being pointing out when you're employing logical fallacies and other forms of sloppy thinking.
If this happens often enough to constitute a stuck record, it looks to me as though the solution is apparent and readily available.
-
The Oxford Dictionary defines it as...
So, no, you don't know what evidence is. Otherwise you would have framed it in your own words instead of copying out a dictionary definition.
As you will notice, this definition doesn't require 'evidence' to fulfill scientific requirements, suggesting that those who believe that it does are the ones who don't understand the term in its totality.
The thing is, Hope, I don't qualify the word with "scientific", it's you that does that. i just ask for evidence that can be verified independently of the people who are claiming it exists. If I can't, in principle, verify some claim you put before me, it worthless as evidence.
Consequently, some of the 'fabled evidence' you like to deride consists of documentary evidence which you can decide to believe or not;
All documents fall into that category. That is why historians have built up a methodology to assign some sort of probability that they are true. I'm afraid your documents in the Bible don't score very well by historical criteria.
Not to mention that a document being fiction is always more probable than a dead man actually coming back to life.
experience - both personal and communal;
It's impossible to tell if an experience inside somebody's head has any relationship to real external phenomena. I could go round and ask lots of Christians about their experiences and I guess if they all have the same ones, we might be on to something. However, people of other religions have experiences of their gods which suggests to me that they are all internal. If Christianity had arisen totally independently in two places, these experiences would count for something. But it didn't and they don't.
perhaps even medical
Medical evidence tells us that two day old corpses do not come back to life.
after all, those who don't believe in miracles believe in something equally illogical/irrational, spontaneous healing - something for which there is never any so-called 'scientific' evidence other than the existence of a person who has been healed from a condition that medical science has no answer to.
Are you talking about the fact that the body has its own self repair mechanisms? There is plenty of scientific evidence that people get better from things.
-
Give us some of this fabled "evidence as a whole".
Actually, do you even know what evidence is?
To answer your second question first; yes I do. The Oxford Dictionary defines it as The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:
.
As you will notice, this definition doesn't require 'evidence' to fulfill scientific requirements, suggesting that those who believe that it does are the ones who don't understand the term in its totality.
Consequently, some of the 'fabled evidence' you like to deride consists of documentary evidence which you can decide to believe or not; experience - both personal and communal; perhaps even medical - after all, those who don't believe in miracles believe in something equally illogical/irrational, spontaneous healing - something for which there is never any so-called 'scientific' evidence other than the existence of a person who has been healed from a condition that medical science has no answer to.
one notices none of that covers supernatural claims, as none of history as a method does. But then despite you being asked multiple times nothing on that so far.
Care to even try or once again as you have done so many times run away and ignore the question. I think it is at least 50 or so times you have done that.
-
like I said Hope it's time to stop digging.
ippy
-
like I said Hope it's time to stop digging.
ippy
How pathetic is this? It's like some tatty kangaroo court.
-
Unbelief must always be the default position until verifiable proof is put forward.
Whaddya mean "must"?! What are you gonna do about it if someone doesn't comply with your little fatwa?
-
So what was going through God's 'mind' when he so easily destroyed the earth in Noah & The Ark story?????
He'd got bored with the dinosaurs?
-
Hope is in 'LA LA' land just like anyone else who suggests they have evidence to support the existence of the deity etc!
No more than those who suggest that the lack of scientific evidence - as opposed to evidence as a whole - are in any better position to judge.
Looks like you've fully exposed yourself Hope, we're all waiting now; oh, for this evidence of yours.
ippy
Good job there was nobody else around! :)
-
So what was going through God's 'mind' when he so easily destroyed the earth in Noah & The Ark story?????
He'd got bored with the dinosaurs?
Does anyone really know what goes on in the mind of a psycho like the Biblical deity?
-
So what was going through God's 'mind' when he so easily destroyed the earth in Noah & The Ark story?????
He'd got bored with the dinosaurs?
Does anyone really know what goes on in the mind of a psycho like the Biblical deity?
Imo, it is impossible to say what goes on in your mind, imo.. Though, imo, it is not is a great deal, imo.
-
So what was going through God's 'mind' when he so easily destroyed the earth in Noah & The Ark story?????
He'd got bored with the dinosaurs?
Does anyone really know what goes on in the mind of a psycho like the Biblical deity?
Well, we would have to have evidence that the deity you are referring to is 1) a psycho [something that you have yet to manage] and 2) that a human could ever fully understand their own mind, let alone that particular deity - in fact, any deity.
-
So what was going through God's 'mind' when he so easily destroyed the earth in Noah & The Ark story?????
He'd got bored with the dinosaurs?
Does anyone really know what goes on in the mind of a psycho like the Biblical deity?
Well, we would have to have evidence that the deity you are referring to is 1) a psycho [something that you have yet to manage] and 2) that a human could ever fully understand their own mind, let alone that particular deity - in fact, any deity.
The Biblical deity is an evil psycho if what is attributed to it is true. A human behaving in the same way would certainly be described as such, wouldn't they?
-
The Biblical deity is an evil psycho if what is attributed to it is true. A human behaving in the same way would certainly be described as such, wouldn't they?
Yes, Floo; the same old stuck record of a claim - made so many times that I have losty count of them - but never supported by any evidence - even dodgy evidence.
Regarding the second question, I suppose one might describe a human being who cared for others so much that they were willing to die to protect them, who offered such protection as a gift without repayment required and who disciplined those he (used in the real English grammar sense of the term) loved as a psycho - but I think one would have to be a psycho oneself to do so.
-
The Biblical deity is an evil psycho if what is attributed to it is true. A human behaving in the same way would certainly be described as such, wouldn't they?
Yes, Floo; the same old stuck record of a claim - made so many times that I have losty count of them - but never supported by any evidence - even dodgy evidence.
Regarding the second question, I suppose one might describe a human being who cared for others so much that they were willing to die to protect them, who offered such protection as a gift without repayment required and who disciplined those he (used in the real English grammar sense of the term) loved as a psycho - but I think one would have to be a psycho oneself to do so.
We are talking about the deity, not the very human Jesus, who was crucified for being a pain in the butt and for no other reason, imo.
If you have ever read the Bible without your rose coloured specs, you might realise that only a psycho would flood the whole world, if that stupid myth had any credibility. It is also supposed to have trashed Sodom and Gomorrah because he didn't like the sexual acts going on there. Was the deity jealous as it wasn't getting enough itself? ::)
-
The Biblical deity is an evil psycho if what is attributed to it is true. A human behaving in the same way would certainly be described as such, wouldn't they?
Yes, Floo; the same old stuck record of a claim - made so many times that I have losty count of them - but never supported by any evidence - even dodgy evidence.
Regarding the second question, I suppose one might describe a human being who cared for others so much that they were willing to die to protect them, who offered such protection as a gift without repayment required and who disciplined those he (used in the real English grammar sense of the term) loved as a psycho - but I think one would have to be a psycho oneself to do so.
I have never understood this idea that Christ died to protect us. Who was he protecting us from? If he was God in human form, then he must have been protecting us from himself! I genuinely cannot fathom that out.
Also, how did being crucified protect us? And why only be dead for a couple of days? How was that any sort of sacrifice?
We don't sacrifice things now, not even goats, so why believe this sacrifice was doing anything at all?
I think Jesus was a freedom fighter who could see that his religion was doing no good and fought for the liberty and the betterment of his fellow Jews. This was why he was executed - if Arthur Scargill had been around in those days, he would have suffered the same fate for the same reason.
-
The Biblical deity is an evil psycho if what is attributed to it is true. A human behaving in the same way would certainly be described as such, wouldn't they?
Yes, Floo; the same old stuck record of a claim - made so many times that I have losty count of them - but never supported by any evidence - even dodgy evidence.
Regarding the second question, I suppose one might describe a human being who cared for others so much that they were willing to die to protect them, who offered such protection as a gift without repayment required and who disciplined those he (used in the real English grammar sense of the term) loved as a psycho - but I think one would have to be a psycho oneself to do so.
I have never understood this idea that Christ died to protect us. Who was he protecting us from? If he was God in human form, then he must have been protecting us from himself! I genuinely cannot fathom that out.
Also, how did being crucified protect us? And why only be dead for a couple of days? How was that any sort of sacrifice?
We don't sacrifice things now, not even goats, so why believe this sacrifice was doing anything at all?
I think Jesus was a freedom fighter who could see that his religion was doing no good and fought for the liberty and the betterment of his fellow Jews. This was why he was executed - if Arthur Scargill had been around in those days, he would have suffered the same fate for the same reason.
It is a fact that, originally, crucifiction was punishment for political crimes against the Roman Empire, hence 'INRI', he was crucified for being hailed as the King of the Jews, not what hew claimed IIRC, but it was seen by the Romans as a rallying cry for those who wanted rid of the Romans.
The Romans didn't give a shit for Judaism or for burgeoning Christianity, they only gave a shit for the Roman Empire and its continuing existence and security.
-
It is a fact that, originally, crucifiction was punishment for political crimes against the Roman Empire, hence 'INRI', he was crucified for being hailed as the King of the Jews, not what hew claimed IIRC, but it was seen by the Romans as a rallying cry for those who wanted rid of the Romans.
The Romans didn't give a shit for Judaism or for burgeoning Christianity, they only gave a shit for the Roman Empire and its continuing existence and security.
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
-
H
You might well be 'surprised' just how tolerant so-called polytheistic religions are. :D
Certainly compared to 'single-godders' ?!?!!?? ;)
-
It is not widely known, but Jesus really hated coconut macaroons.
-
It is not widely known, but Jesus really hated coconut macaroons.
Oh dear, I thought it was doughnut macaroni he didn't like, but my hearing isn't to good these days. :(
-
It is a fact that, originally, crucifiction was punishment for political crimes against the Roman Empire, hence 'INRI', he was crucified for being hailed as the King of the Jews, not what hew claimed IIRC, but it was seen by the Romans as a rallying cry for those who wanted rid of the Romans.
The Romans didn't give a shit for Judaism or for burgeoning Christianity, they only gave a shit for the Roman Empire and its continuing existence and security.
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
As long as they didn't threaten Roman rule.
-
It is not widely known, but Jesus really hated coconut macaroons.
Oh dear, I thought it was doughnut macaroni he didn't like, but my hearing isn't to good these days. :(
I think it's more like your brain. :)
-
It is a fact that, originally, crucifiction was punishment for political crimes against the Roman Empire, hence 'INRI', he was crucified for being hailed as the King of the Jews, not what hew claimed IIRC, but it was seen by the Romans as a rallying cry for those who wanted rid of the Romans.
The Romans didn't give a shit for Judaism or for burgeoning Christianity, they only gave a shit for the Roman Empire and its continuing existence and security.
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
-
It is a fact that, originally, crucifiction was punishment for political crimes against the Roman Empire, hence 'INRI', he was crucified for being hailed as the King of the Jews, not what hew claimed IIRC, but it was seen by the Romans as a rallying cry for those who wanted rid of the Romans.
The Romans didn't give a shit for Judaism or for burgeoning Christianity, they only gave a shit for the Roman Empire and its continuing existence and security.
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
-
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
Sorry to hear that; I was simply reflecting the bulk of historical material I've read and heard reported over the last 30+ years.
-
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
Sorry to hear that; I was simply reflecting the bulk of historical material I've read and heard reported over the last 30+ years.
And me over the last 55+ years!
I am truly sorry, Hope, but I have read your posts for a while now and there appears to be nothing that you haven't read about, been taught about, heard about, learnt about in you your travels just about everywhere and your interaction with just about every religion known to man or beast, and to try to talk to you is just about impossible as you seem to know just about everything about everything!
I leave you to your towering knowledge of everything.
-
Ouch ;D
Beautiful and brilliant post :)
-
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
Sorry to hear that; I was simply reflecting the bulk of historical material I've read and heard reported over the last 30+ years.
And me over the last 55+ years!
I am truly sorry, Hope, but I have read your posts for a while now and there appears to be nothing that you haven't read about, been taught about, heard about, learnt about in you your travels just about everywhere and your interaction with just about every religion known to man or beast, and to try to talk to you is just about impossible as you seem to know just about everything about everything!
I leave you to your towering knowledge of everything.
Good grief: I could have written that self-same post about you - scientist, philosopher, theologian, general oracle on all matters!
-
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
Sorry to hear that; I was simply reflecting the bulk of historical material I've read and heard reported over the last 30+ years.
And me over the last 55+ years!
I am truly sorry, Hope, but I have read your posts for a while now and there appears to be nothing that you haven't read about, been taught about, heard about, learnt about in you your travels just about everywhere and your interaction with just about every religion known to man or beast, and to try to talk to you is just about impossible as you seem to know just about everything about everything!
I leave you to your towering knowledge of everything.
Good grief: I could have written that self-same post about you - scientist, philosopher, theologian, general oracle on all matters!
And I about you also except that you come up as a one-trick-pony blinkered to see only what the Book of Chinese whispers tells him.
What I find so irritating is the inability of some to see that they are not always totally right - I am totally right on, possibly, one item in five or even ten, if I'm lucky.
I was, as I remember, totally wrong in my acceptance of my father's professed religion. Managed to put that one right though, even if it did take me about 40 years to do so.
-
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
Sorry to hear that; I was simply reflecting the bulk of historical material I've read and heard reported over the last 30+ years.
As I understand it the Romans didn't care who did what or believed what amongst the Jews (Essenes, Pharisees, Sadducees and even the Zealots) as long as no-one upset the peace or challenged Rome in any way. Jews were exempt from military service, IIRC, whereas other nations and religions were not. Once, at least, 6000 Pharisees got away with not swearing allegiance to Caesar (though a fine had to be paid).
-
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
Sorry to hear that; I was simply reflecting the bulk of historical material I've read and heard reported over the last 30+ years.
That fits in with your delusion.
ippy
-
Nat, the Romans didn't seem to have any problems with Jesus until the Jewish authorities arrested him and asked that he should be executed for blasphemy. In fact, the Romans were remarkably tolerant when it came to religious variety.
Quite clearly your history teacher had a very different view of such things to mine!
And mine! ::)
Sorry to hear that; I was simply reflecting the bulk of historical material I've read and heard reported over the last 30+ years.
And me over the last 55+ years!
I am truly sorry, Hope, but I have read your posts for a while now and there appears to be nothing that you haven't read about, been taught about, heard about, learnt about in you your travels just about everywhere and your interaction with just about every religion known to man or beast, and to try to talk to you is just about impossible as you seem to know just about everything about everything!
I leave you to your towering knowledge of everything.
I have met and had to deal with many teachers in my working life and in my experience there are a lot of teachers that on receiving their degree they seem to think that they have at the same time acquired the key to all of the knowledge in the universe, not all of them of course but it's not unusual, it seems to go with the trade.
ippy
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
-
If some Christians have 'god given ' brains it proves the deity is all that is evil! :o
The same could be said about non-Christians with 'god-given' brains, I suppose, Floo. ;) Do you fit into that category, perhaps? ;D
I am a 'wicked heathen' and proud to be so! ;D However, I do my best to help others along the way. Even though I fall well short of perfection, at least I haven't perpetrated the evil deeds attributed to the Biblical deity!
You mock God, you lie about God and you put yourself above God. You constantly deny Satan and you attribute evil to God.
What if someone said that you brought everything on yourself with your family by rebelling? What God and Jesus does is nowhere the same as your grandmother or parents..
What evil you do is you do not honour thy Father and Mother nor do you honour the true God of heaven and earth.
All for the sake of fitting in this world... In truth the path to hell is paved with good intentions...
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
No, you do not have to be a rocket scientist - you have to be a blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed Christian.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
No, you do not have to be a rocket scientist - you have to be a blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed Christian.
Nah! doesn't cut the mustard... the greatest love you can have is to die for another.... So if the greatest love you can have is to die for another then God showed his love by sending his Son to die in the place of all humanity...
So deluded and brainwashed is an excuse because you don't want the bible to be true. But the facts speak for themselves and you cannot change the truth and no amount of excuses can change it...
-
No, you do not have to be a rocket scientist - you have to be a blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed Christian.
Or more likely, a 'blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed' atheist, Nat. From a logical pov, what Sass has stated is perfectly acceptable. You might want to query its rationality, but even then, there is a perfectly legitimate rationale behind it.
Please try better next time you want to diss someone's comment and/or opinion.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans really needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
-
Nah! doesn't cut the mustard... the greatest love you can have is to die for another.... So if the greatest love you can have is to die for another then God showed his love by sending his Son to die in the place of all humanity...
So deluded and brainwashed is an excuse because you don't want the bible to be true. But the facts speak for themselves and you cannot change the truth and no amount of excuses can change it...
Unfortunately for you, Sass, they are not facts or the truth ... they are just stories you believe because you are over-credulous.
-
No, you do not have to be a rocket scientist - you have to be a blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed Christian.
Or more likely, a 'blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed' atheist, Nat. From a logical pov, what Sass has stated is perfectly acceptable. You might want to query its rationality, but even then, there is a perfectly legitimate rationale behind it.
Please try better next time you want to diss someone's comment and/or opinion.
Didn't you mean indoctrinated?
ippy
-
No, you do not have to be a rocket scientist - you have to be a blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed Christian.
Or more likely, a 'blinkered, rose-coloured-spectacle-wearing, deluded and totally brainwashed' atheist, Nat. From a logical pov, what Sass has stated is perfectly acceptable. You might want to query its rationality, but even then, there is a perfectly legitimate rationale behind it.
Please try better next time you want to diss someone's comment and/or opinion.
I am not an atheist! If you ever bothered to actually read what was written and not what you want to see you would know that!
There is absolutely nothing logical or rational about it.
-
Nah! doesn't cut the mustard... the greatest love you can have is to die for another.... So if the greatest love you can have is to die for another then God showed his love by sending his Son to die in the place of all humanity...
So deluded and brainwashed is an excuse because you don't want the bible to be true. But the facts speak for themselves and you cannot change the truth and no amount of excuses can change it...
Unfortunately for you, Sass, they are not facts or the truth ... they are just stories you believe because you are over-credulous.
Well said LJ!
-
Unfortunately for you, Sass, they are not facts or the truth ... they are just stories you believe because you are over-credulous.
Another claim masquerading as a fact. You atheists and your unsupported assertions!
-
OOH The IRONY of that reply ?!!?!? ;)
-
Unfortunately for you, Sass, they are not facts or the truth ... they are just stories you believe because you are over-credulous.
Another claim masquerading as a fact. You atheists and your unsupported assertions!
Yes, some of us are as bad as Christians at it. :)
-
Didn't you mean indoctrinated?
ippy
Not sure that 'indoctrinated' fits with literary criticism and linguistic study, ippy. Sorry if you find the scientific/linguistic references hard to understand.
-
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans really needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
So, suddenly, you are suggesting that what the New Testament is all about - God dying to save humanity - is what he ought to have done. I do believe that you are getting to close to understanding the material.
-
I am truly sorry, Hope, but I have read your posts for a while now and there appears to be nothing that you haven't read about, been taught about, heard about, learnt about in you your travels just about everywhere and your interaction with just about every religion known to man or beast, and to try to talk to you is just about impossible as you seem to know just about everything about everything!
I leave you to your towering knowledge of everything.
Are you sure that you've been reading my posts, Nat. Yes, I have had a wide range of experiences and done a fair amount of study during my life, but nothing that remotely reflects what you have described here. I realise that hyperbole can sometimes make a point, but when its quite as off the wall as your post is, it becomes clear that the point has been lost.
-
Didn't you mean indoctrinated?
ippy
Not sure that 'indoctrinated' fits with literary criticism and linguistic study, ippy. Sorry if you find the scientific/linguistic references hard to understand.
No not at all Hope, it's just that in the context of that post of yours you used the wrong word, brainwashing methods are not used anywhere any more because it proved to be unsuccessful, so really unless you're referring to the Koreans circa the Korean war, well, it no longer applies anywhere.
Nobody tries to brainwash people any more, it's not like it worked in the first place, you definitely meant indoctrination we all make mistakes, even I do from time to time, I know that's hard to believe but it's true.
Look it up on Wikkie you might learn something.
Ippy
-
I am truly sorry, Hope, but I have read your posts for a while now and there appears to be nothing that you haven't read about, been taught about, heard about, learnt about in you your travels just about everywhere and your interaction with just about every religion known to man or beast, and to try to talk to you is just about impossible as you seem to know just about everything about everything!
I leave you to your towering knowledge of everything.
Are you sure that you've been reading my posts, Nat. Yes, I have had a wide range of experiences and done a fair amount of study during my life, but nothing that remotely reflects what you have described here. I realise that hyperbole can sometimes make a point, but when its quite as off the wall as your post is, it becomes clear that the point has been lost.
DAMN GREAT BIG YAWN!
-
OOH The IRONY of that reply ?!!?!? ;)
Yes, well spotted. It is indeed ironic that atheists themselves are guilty of what they constantly bleat on about theists allegedly doing.
-
No not at all Hope, it's just that in the context of that post of yours you used the wrong word,...
In the context of that post, ippy - in which I was quoting another poster - the word was exactly right.
Look it up on Wikkie you might learn something.
If you kept up with the thread, you might learn something as well.
-
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans really needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
So, suddenly, you are suggesting that what the New Testament is all about - God dying to save humanity - is what he ought to have done. I do believe that you are getting to close to understanding the material.
:D :D And I'm going to win the Lottery for the next ten weeks in a row!!
-
OOH The IRONY of that reply ?!!?!? ;)
Yes, well spotted. It is indeed ironic that atheists themselves are guilty of what they constantly bleat on about theists allegedly doing.
And what might they be, por favor??
I'M not an atheist BTW
Nick
-
OOH The IRONY of that reply ?!!?!? ;)
Yes, well spotted. It is indeed ironic that atheists themselves are guilty of what they constantly bleat on about theists allegedly doing.
And what might they be, por favor??
I'M not an atheist BTW
Nick
(a) making assertions without evidence
(b) I never said (nor thought) you were. It isn't all about you, you know!
-
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans really needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
So, suddenly, you are suggesting that what the New Testament is all about - God dying to save humanity - is what he ought to have done. I do believe that you are getting to close to understanding the material.
What I understand is what fanciful nonsense it appears to be! ::)
-
No not at all Hope, it's just that in the context of that post of yours you used the wrong word,...
In the context of that post, ippy - in which I was quoting another poster - the word was exactly right.
Look it up on Wikkie you might learn something.
If you kept up with the thread, you might learn something as well.
Just because the other poster used the word brainwashing when they meant indoctrination doesn't excuse you from using the wrong word too.
You really need to get this indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with), as opposed to brainwashing mostly attempted, unsuccessfully, by the Koreans in the fifties.
ippy
-
indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with)
Really? And in the little drama which is going on in your head, do they have little meetings with calculators and flip-charts trying to work out how many they think they can get away with?
Have you spoken to a doctor about these conspiracy theories?
-
indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with)
Really? And in the little drama which is going on in your head, do they have little meetings with calculators and flip-charts trying to work out how many they think they can get away with?
Have you spoken to a doctor about these conspiracy theories?
Anything like indoctrination works on percentages. It's one thing attempting to indoctrinate people/children.
Ippy
-
indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with)
Really? And in the little drama which is going on in your head, do they have little meetings with calculators and flip-charts trying to work out how many they think they can get away with?
Have you spoken to a doctor about these conspiracy theories?
Anything like indoctrination works on percentages. It's one thing attempting to indoctrinate people/children.
Ippy
Gosh, your delusion really is elaborate isn't it?
seek help.
-
Just because the other poster used the word brainwashing when they meant indoctrination doesn't excuse you from using the wrong word too.
So, you would like me to break the rules of the forum by quoting something said by another poster incorrectly?
You really need to get this indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with), ...
You need to understand that what the religious do is no different to what everyone does, ippy. I realise that you think that using a big word like 'indoctrination' makes you sound big, but there is no more indoctrination by religious peole than there is by any parent.
-
You need to understand that what the religious do is no different to what everyone does, ippy. I realise that you think that using a big word like 'indoctrination' makes you sound big, but there is no more indoctrination by religious peole than there is by any parent.
Of the parent who says nothing at all about religion to their child(ren) and the parent who raises their offspring to believe that Christianity/Islam/Judaism/insert any other religion as the truth (indeed, the one, true, final, absolute and unalterable truth), it's pretty clear that the latter parent is doing far more in the indoctrination stakes.
-
Just because the other poster used the word brainwashing when they meant indoctrination doesn't excuse you from using the wrong word too.
So, you would like me to break the rules of the forum by quoting something said by another poster incorrectly?
You really need to get this indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with), ...
You need to understand that what the religious do is no different to what everyone does, ippy. I realise that you think that using a big word like 'indoctrination' makes you sound big, but there is no more indoctrination by religious peole than there is by any parent.
If the poster quotes the word brainwashing shouldn't you be addressing brainwashing ie Korea etc, or do you mean that you misunderstood that post.
Which school is it that tries to introduce atheism even A C Graylings school doesn't promote atheism.
Schools are allowed by the law to discriminate when selecting employees.
What's this ethos mentioned in connection with schooling all about it's frequently referred to by various religionists?
The majority of schools that have religious connections are also the ones that have the younger children?
The religious wouldn't dream of swaying the vulnerable young school children into the direction of their particular beliefs, no they wouldn't have done that or keep right on doing it would they?
Over to you Hope in your narrow little made up dream world.
ippy
-
indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with)
Really? And in the little drama which is going on in your head, do they have little meetings with calculators and flip-charts trying to work out how many they think they can get away with?
Have you spoken to a doctor about these conspiracy theories?
Anything like indoctrination works on percentages. It's one thing attempting to indoctrinate people/children.
Ippy
Don't you realise that you are doing, over a period of years, what you are accusing the religious of doing? No, you don't; I was silly suggesting you might.
-
indoctrination, ( that's what the religious do to as many young children they think they can get away with)
Really? And in the little drama which is going on in your head, do they have little meetings with calculators and flip-charts trying to work out how many they think they can get away with?
Have you spoken to a doctor about these conspiracy theories?
Anything like indoctrination works on percentages. It's one thing attempting to indoctrinate people/children.
Ippy
Don't you realise that you are doing, over a period of years, what you are accusing the religious of doing? No, you don't; I was silly suggesting you might.
Have you told all of those atheists running all of these atheist schools about this B A?
No?
ippy
-
I've always been of the opinion that it's EXTREMELY rare there's only ONE solution-answer to any question. ;) ;D
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans really needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
God cannot die, he is the true immortal...
As for the rest... your ignorance be it deliberate or otherwise is clearly showing...
-
For the record... was it only Christian men who were soldiers and gave their lives in the war....
Sometimes people make the most unreasoned comments ever...
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans really needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
God cannot die, he is the true immortal...
As for the rest... your ignorance be it deliberate or otherwise is clearly showing...
Another nonsense statement from Sass. ::) You can't provide any evidence it actually exists let alone the nature of the deity! Accusing someone of ignorance it totally stupid when yours is so great!
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans relly there needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
God cannot die, he is the true immortal...
As for the rest... your ignorance be it deliberate or otherwise is clearly showing...
Another nonsense statement from Sass. ::) You can't provide any evidence it actually exists let alone the nature of the deity! Accusing someone of ignorance it totally stupid when yours is so great!
Sass your post equates to a rather childish, would be adult in full tantrum calling out over their sholder as they run out of the room slaming the door behind them.
You haven't to date provided any evidence that this he she or it thing that resides in your imagination actually exists and every time you are reminded of this or asked there is always a long silence; failing that there seems to be some need to throw another tantrum.
Really Sass it's quite simple, where is there any evidence that would support your idea that there is in fact a he she or it thing you like to refer to as a god or something in existance somewhere, only you've never actually proved that your god thing exists.
See if you can supply the relevant information without throwing another tantrum.
ippy.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans relly there needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
God cannot die, he is the true immortal...
As for the rest... your ignorance be it deliberate or otherwise is clearly showing...
Another nonsense statement from Sass. ::) You can't provide any evidence it actually exists let alone the nature of the deity! Accusing someone of ignorance it totally stupid when yours is so great!
Sass your post equates to a rather childish, would be adult in full tantrum calling out over their sholder as they run out of the room slaming the door behind them.
You haven't to date provided any evidence that this he she or it thing that resides in your imagination actually exists and every time you are reminded of this or asked there is always a long silence; failing that there seems to be some need to throw another tantrum.
Really Sass it's quite simple, where is there any evidence that would support your idea that there is in fact a he she or it thing you like to refer to as a god or something in existance somewhere, only you've never actually proved that your god thing exists.
See if you can supply the relevant information without throwing another tantrum.
ippy.
I have odds of 1/100 for the answer to be in the negative! And I don't mean just from Sassy either.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans relly there needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
God cannot die, he is the true immortal...
As for the rest... your ignorance be it deliberate or otherwise is clearly showing...
Another nonsense statement from Sass. ::) You can't provide any evidence it actually exists let alone the nature of the deity! Accusing someone of ignorance it totally stupid when yours is so great!
Sass your post equates to a rather childish, would be adult in full tantrum calling out over their sholder as they run out of the room slaming the door behind them.
You haven't to date provided any evidence that this he she or it thing that resides in your imagination actually exists and every time you are reminded of this or asked there is always a long silence; failing that there seems to be some need to throw another tantrum.
Really Sass it's quite simple, where is there any evidence that would support your idea that there is in fact a he she or it thing you like to refer to as a god or something in existance somewhere, only you've never actually proved that your god thing exists.
See if you can supply the relevant information without throwing another tantrum.
ippy.
I have odds of 1/100 for the answer to be in the negative! And I don't mean just from Sassy either.
I never used to bite my fingernails, wish you hadn't told me, just hope I can get some sleep tonight.
;)ippy
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans relly there needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
God cannot die, he is the true immortal...
As for the rest... your ignorance be it deliberate or otherwise is clearly showing...
Another nonsense statement from Sass. ::) You can't provide any evidence it actually exists let alone the nature of the deity! Accusing someone of ignorance it totally stupid when yours is so great!
Sass your post equates to a rather childish, would be adult in full tantrum calling out over their sholder as they run out of the room slaming the door behind them.
You haven't to date provided any evidence that this he she or it thing that resides in your imagination actually exists and every time you are reminded of this or asked there is always a long silence; failing that there seems to be some need to throw another tantrum.
Really Sass it's quite simple, where is there any evidence that would support your idea that there is in fact a he she or it thing you like to refer to as a god or something in existance somewhere, only you've never actually proved that your god thing exists.
See if you can supply the relevant information without throwing another tantrum.
ippy.
I have odds of 1/100 for the answer to be in the negative! And I don't mean just from Sassy either.
I never used to bite my fingernails, wish you hadn't told me, just hope I can get some sleep tonight.
;)ippy
Don't bother - you are on a racing certainty that Sassy will never, in a million years be able to "supply the relevant information without throwing another tantrum.". She (he?) might be able to do one OR the other but never both at the same time.
Incidentally, and re nothing in particular, I bit my fingernails from ythe ahe of about 18 months unril I was 48 years old, bit them down so far that they would bleed.
Having been taken to hospital with an asthma attack that nearly killed me (smoking 20+ a day when you are a life-long asthmatic does that for you), I somehow, I really know not how, I managed to give up both smoking and biting my nails during the same 10 day stay in hospital.
-
Fags, Homosexuals, same sex marriage.
Apart from shellfish and cloven hooves, what else does Jesus hate?
Jesus doesn't hate people...
God doesn't hate people. God hates sin not the sinner... :o
And you know that for a FACT, do you? ;D
Elementary... if God hated the sinner he would not have sent his Son to die to save them, whilst still sinners, would he?
Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out...
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the deity should have died itself if humans relly there needed 'saving', as human nature was its creation, rather than get a young unmarried girl pregnant, in order that his 'son' would die a gruesome death! Get real, Sass!
God cannot die, he is the true immortal...
As for the rest... your ignorance be it deliberate or otherwise is clearly showing...
Another nonsense statement from Sass. ::) You can't provide any evidence it actually exists let alone the nature of the deity! Accusing someone of ignorance it totally stupid when yours is so great!
Sass your post equates to a rather childish, would be adult in full tantrum calling out over their sholder as they run out of the room slaming the door behind them.
You haven't to date provided any evidence that this he she or it thing that resides in your imagination actually exists and every time you are reminded of this or asked there is always a long silence; failing that there seems to be some need to throw another tantrum.
Really Sass it's quite simple, where is there any evidence that would support your idea that there is in fact a he she or it thing you like to refer to as a god or something in existance somewhere, only you've never actually proved that your god thing exists.
See if you can supply the relevant information without throwing another tantrum.
ippy.
I have odds of 1/100 for the answer to be in the negative! And I don't mean just from Sassy either.
I never used to bite my fingernails, wish you hadn't told me, just hope I can get some sleep tonight.
;)ippy
Don't bother - you are on a racing certainty that Sassy will never, in a million years be able to "supply the relevant information without throwing another tantrum.". She (he?) might be able to do one OR the other but never both at the same time.
Incidentally, and re nothing in particular, I bit my fingernails from the age of about 18 months until I was 48 years old, bit them down so far that they would bleed.
Having been taken to hospital with an asthma attack that nearly killed me (smoking 20+ a day when you are a life-long asthmatic does that for you), I somehow, I really know not how, I managed to give up both smoking and biting my nails during the same 10 day stay in hospital.
The lack of response from Sass is in its self an answer, it would be good if we didn't have the tantrums or the endless chapter and verse rubbish from Sass, but there you go.
Hope things turn out alright with the asthma, the smoking I tried it once at about age about 20 and just by chance alone I thought they were disgusting and that was it, never smoked again, luck not a health decision.
I've still lost half a lung last September some sort of infection that turned out to be just that but otherwise benign, all OK now.
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
Perhaps the fairies might have a spell to stop me worrying about Sass's posts like the things she might say about me?
ippy
-
Someone not replying to a post should not be seen that they are somehow stumped. Sometimes I miss posts, sometimes I am not on the board for a while and don't really feel the need to repl due to time past, others I just get bored with some discussions.
I don't think anything can be said about Sassy not responding to a post other than she has not responded to it.
-
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
Perhaps the fairies might have a spell to stop me worrying about Sass's posts like the things she might say about me?
ippy
I realise that you are being ironic, but it has to be said. Anybody who takes any notice of Sass's opinion of them (whether it's good or bad) needs help with their self-confidence. :)
-
The lack of response from Sass is in its self an answer, ...
[Are we to take it that when you fail to respond to a question - as, in truth, you sometimes do - its an answer in itself, ip?
As NS points out in his post, ther can be a variety of reasons for not replying to a post or question. I remember getting home from a 2-week holiday (this took place on a different forum, by the way) to a huge storm as to my cowardice in not replying to a post that had been posted 2 weeks earlier - at a time that I had no internet access, even if I had had my laptop with me. Unlike some, I try not to signal my absence from home, especially on social media, choosing instead to mention that I have just returned from wherever.
I've still lost half a lung last September some sort of infection that turned out to be just that but otherwise benign, all OK now.
Sorry to hear about the lung. The chairman of the rilway I'm involved with lost 2/3rds of one of his 2 years ago - again down to some sort of infection. He finds the dehabilitation seriously frustrating.
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
I hope they help you relax - or perhaps I ought to say that I hope your belief in such things helps you relax.
-
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
Perhaps the fairies might have a spell to stop me worrying about Sass's posts like the things she might say about me?
ippy
I realise that you are being ironic, but it has to be said. Anybody who takes any notice of Sass's opinion of them (whether it's good or bad) needs help with their self-confidence. :)
Agreed! ;D
-
Quote
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
I hope they help you relax - or perhaps I ought to say that I hope your belief in such things helps you relax.
As unicorns and fairies are as credible as the Biblical deity and its deeds, it is quite reasonable a belief in them could be beneficial! ;D
-
The lack of response from Sass is in its self an answer, ...
[Are we to take it that when you fail to respond to a question - as, in truth, you sometimes do - its an answer in itself, ip?
As NS points out in his post, ther can be a variety of reasons for not replying to a post or question. I remember getting home from a 2-week holiday (this took place on a different forum, by the way) to a huge storm as to my cowardice in not replying to a post that had been posted 2 weeks earlier - at a time that I had no internet access, even if I had had my laptop with me. Unlike some, I try not to signal my absence from home, especially on social media, choosing instead to mention that I have just returned from wherever.
I've still lost half a lung last September some sort of infection that turned out to be just that but otherwise benign, all OK now.
Sorry to hear about the lung. The chairman of the rilway I'm involved with lost 2/3rds of one of his 2 years ago - again down to some sort of infection. He finds the dehabilitation seriously frustrating.
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
I hope they help you relax - or perhaps I ought to say that I hope your belief in such things helps you relax.
Thanks for the thought Hope, firing on all four now, fortunately, for every one else, it didn't affect my looks; as for Sass you have no idea of the amount of torture I go through when I have consulted the oracle and no reply that would augerment my lack of sleep that would otherwise second sight or see me through the week.
I find Sass entertaining, love the reams of text, can hardly wait for the next lot.
ippy
-
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
Perhaps the fairies might have a spell to stop me worrying about Sass's posts like the things she might say about me?
ippy
I realise that you are being ironic, but it has to be said. Anybody who takes any notice of Sass's opinion of them (whether it's good or bad) needs help with their self-confidence. :)
I admire her character Len, she's OK but if anyone puts their head above the parapet.
"Needs help with their self-confidence". Hope you're not planting nasturtiums.
ippy
-
Quote
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
I hope they help you relax - or perhaps I ought to say that I hope your belief in such things helps you relax.
As unicorns and fairies are as credible as the Biblical deity and its deeds, it is quite reasonable a belief in them could be beneficial! ;D
Just got back from having a flooing conversation with them fairies, they were spellbinding but I didn't get into a flap about it.
ippy
-
"Needs help with their self-confidence". Hope you're not planting nasturtiums.
ippy
There you go again, forgetting my age and my inability to comprehend modern humour. What does that mean?
-
"Needs help with their self-confidence". Hope you're not planting nasturtiums.
ippy
There you go again, forgetting my age and my inability to comprehend modern humour. What does that mean?
I'm not exactly a spring chicken myself Len I'm 73, planting nasturtiums on some one's character, (Mrs Malaprop).
ippy
-
Quote
Anyway I have to go now I've got to feed the Unicorn and have to have a chat with the fairies at the end of the garden.
I hope they help you relax - or perhaps I ought to say that I hope your belief in such things helps you relax.
As unicorns and fairies are as credible as the Biblical deity and its deeds, it is quite reasonable a belief in them could be beneficial! ;D
Just got back from having a flooing conversation with them fairies, they were spellbinding but I didn't get into a flap about it.
ippy
I am glad those fairies did the business for you. ;D
-
"Needs help with their self-confidence". Hope you're not planting nasturtiums.
ippy
There you go again, forgetting my age and my inability to comprehend modern humour. What does that mean?
I'm not exactly a spring chicken myself Len I'm 73, planting nasturtiums on some one's character, (Mrs Malaprop).
ippy
OIC! It's like cockney rhyming slang. "casting aspersions". No fool like an old fool! :)
-
But there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle :)
-
But there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle :)
:) :) :)
You have a penchant for saying the right thing.
-
"But there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle." "No fool like an old fool." So you're saying he's just a fiddling old fool! ;D
-
But there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle :)
:) :) :)
You have a penchant for saying the right thing.
Malapropisms Len, Les Dawson's speciality, remember the articulate lorry driver?
ippy
-
But there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle :)
:) :) :)
You have a penchant for saying the right thing.
Malapropisms Len, Les Dawson's speciality, remember the articulate lorry driver?
ippy
No, I'm afraid my memory is a blank about his humour but I remember the name. :(
-
But there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle :)
:) :) :)
You have a penchant for saying the right thing.
Malapropisms Len, Les Dawson's speciality, remember the articulate lorry driver?
ippy
No, I'm afraid my memory is a blank about his humour but I remember the name. :(
The late, great Les Dawson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxmu9HKN4gY
-
But there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle :)
:) :) :)
You have a penchant for saying the right thing.
Malapropisms Len, Les Dawson's speciality, remember the articulate lorry driver?
ippy
No, I'm afraid my memory is a blank about his humour but I remember the name. :(
I have a particular fondness for his reference to a scottish game-bird of the grouse family which Les referred to as the "fartagain".