Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Christians: Why would an all-good God base our salvation from Hell on whether or not we believe in a 2,000-year-old supernatural story?


Lyra

Recommended Posts

 

It gets more depressing daily. The upside is that it is just this kind of demonstration of "faith" that serves to instruct lurkers on what the religion does to people. It rots their brain.

Florduh, I know this is depressing, but can this thread be eventually pinned? 

 

This IS a cult, I know, I grew up from birth with the EXACT shit he is spouting ... it is not "faith" as is being proclaimed .... it is "blind faith" ... that is one hell of a difference!

 

I have fed this link to a few people to show just how vile this 'brand" of christianity is. Several have replied and cannot believe that people can be so closed minded when "FACTS" are presented. I think he is doing his cause way more harm than good!

 

But of course he is being "PERSCUTED" in the name of christ ... I could even write his comeback lines if I wished, but I do not wish to have ANY dialogue with a close minded bigot!

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"What I said was you err because you trust what science says as final conclusions.  And they are not.  They are conclusions at this time only.   Open for change." 

 

"You err because you trust science to give you final conclusions, which it can't.   It is always still learning."

 

"You don't trust or expect science to offer final conclusions.    Which means your so called 'evidence' is very 'fluid'."  

 

Hello again Stranger.

I've cited you three times because I'm interested to find out more about your take on science.  

Of the sciences, mathematics is considered to be the one that deals in absolutes.

Therefore, if I give you an example, perhaps you could demonstrate for me the fluidity of this evidence?  

Or show me why the example isn't a final conclusion?  

Or how this example is open for change?

 

Here it is.

 

2 + 2 = 4

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

 

 

See the Book of Numbers, the answer is 7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Perhaps this is so informative and telling it should be pinned. Any mods want to weigh in?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started counting the number of bald/mere assertions poster Stranger has made in this thread.  I stopped at 100 and I was only about one-half way though the thread.  He's made many more since then.

 

Poster Stranger is a Mere Assertion Peddler™, with side salads of irrationality, denialism, vacuousness, intellectually bankruptcy, cowardice, sanctimoniousness and disingenuousness.

 

Put more simply, poster Stranger is full of himself and full of shit, which is pretty much the same thing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Yes, not to mention the number of instances of circular reasoning, despite circular reasoning being pointed out and explained multiple times by multiple people!

 

We weren't even arguing against the bible, just saying hey your reasoning here is circular, you need to come up with a valid argument... yet Stranger still engaged in circular reasoning.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

No, but hopefully others will read this and realize what an intellectually dishonest position you hold and rethink their own faith.

 

 

Its only reliable to you - it means nothing to someone else and you cannot demonstrate the truth of your faith to anyone else. And you have yet to demonstrate God so the first line is an assertion without good reason to believe it.

 

 

So God is intentionally hiding things from us, and made the world such as it is to be discovered by science, but for that science to be wrong?

 

 

Which means your mind is closed and you don't care about the truth, whatever that truth may be. Whereas I do care, and my mind is open to what the truth might be. That you cannot demonstrate what you believe is true does not detract from the fact that I am open to what is true. That is the difference between you and I.

 

 

You demonstrate a poor understanding of science. Some science is so solid that it can be fact, or laws. Take the theory of gravity. While our understanding of it changes, the fact of gravity is not fluid. Anyone who thinks it is can jump off a cliff and see if their 'fluid' science stops for them for a while.

 

Other areas of science, such as those areas at the edge of our understand could be describe as fluid as we learn more about particular subjects.

 

Evidence can be the same. If I take a ball and drop it 100 times, it will fall to the ground 100 times. This is evidence of the theory of gravity. It's not fluid... it's pretty solid. I can apply the same evidence to different objects and get the same result. Other evidence requires more interpretation and sometimes we getting differing interpretations as to how the evidence fits. But over all, after long periods of study, the knowledge of a subject becomes more robust and tentative conclusions reached.

 

Regarding the bible - in some cases its the lack of evidence that speaks most loudly. No sign of a global flood, no signs of a mass exodus from Egypt. On top of that there is evidence of the Israelite arising out of local Canaanite populations. This is some solid evidence against the bible... and I don't think I've brushed the dust off the top of the jumbo bin of evidence against the bible.

 

On the other hand you evidence is faith, which you cannot demonstrate even to a fluid degree. Try this one for size:

 

"I tell all of you with certainty, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you."

 

and nothing will be impossible for you."

 

Nothing Stranger, nothing impossible for you.

 

So video yourself moving a mountain and you will have a mountain of evidence I will believe....

.

.

.

 

Wait for the excuse... wait for it.... :D 

 

Oh, my faith insults your intelligence?    How sad.  But then that is what God intended.  

 

No, it is reliable to others who come by faith.   It is not reliable to those who come by intellect.   That must hurt.  Your intellect plays no role.  Ouch.

 

Man can discover truths of creation.   Because God has created.   But man cannot know God by science.   Because science seeks knowledge outside of God.  

 

My mind is closed to God.  I know God created the earth and universe.  You don't.  Thus I am close minded to you.  You offer 'theories', hypothesis,  which you believe but don't  know.  Sort of like you hope.  Sort of like you place 'faith' in.  Oh my.  Are you placing faith in science?

 

I have no problem with gravity.  When one jumps out of an 8 story building he falls.   I have a problem when science says we know gravity so God must not exist.  

 

So, my response will be nothing but an excuse?  You have prepared your readers to accept anything I say as an 'excuse'.   Very manipulative.   And expected.

 

Stranger

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I agree that they are being discussed, but you are completely ignoring anything reasonable because it contradicts your faith. Even though what you place faith in has contradicted itself many times over. Don't talk about reason until you are willing to look at a viewpoint other than what you have been taught to believe.

 

What is 'reasonable' to you and others who reject Christ is not reasonable to me.  

 

My faith does not contradict me or God.  It contradicts you.   Big deal.   It's to be expected.

 

Don't talk about faith til you know what you are talking about.  

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I see Judaism as a much more coherent religion than Christianity, with only 3 major variants.  It's still based on mythology, but it promotes a much more practical worldview and is much more oriented towards works.

 

If for some bizarre reason I had to adopt one of the Abrahamic religions and had to pretend to believe (not capable of actual religious faith, so it would all be make-believe regardless of which one I chose), I would opt for Reform Judaism over any Christian sect.

 

That is interesting.  Because Christians see the Old Testament as from God.    But you don't.  But you choose Judaism over Christianity.  Do the Orthodox Jews agree with you, that their religion is not of God?/   

 

If you had to pretend to believe, which is what you always did anyway, It is not real.   Indeed, bizarre.

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I'd bet good money -- thousands of dollars, in fact -- on the premise that your faith can't actually do anything tangible in the real world.  Perhaps it makes you feel special, and causes you to fear death less because you think you have a spot in heaven.  I rather doubt that you could bring someone back from the dead, or restore a limb to an amputee.  As such, your idea of faith "working" is weak sauce. 

 

 

 

 

Nevertheless, you are inexorably fated to lose your faith at the moment of physical death.  As soon as your heart stops and your brain ceases functioning, you will fall into unconsciousness and not even know that you no longer believe anything.  I predict, with 99.999...% certainty, that you will never see heaven no matter how fervently you believe or how much you pray.

 

 

 

Predict all you want.  You are stepping out on faith.    Why not 100% accuracy? 

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

*sigh* As opposed to sky wisdom? Is there any other kind of wisdom? You know your book is "of the world" written by "fallen men?" Right?

As for telling you how much you remind us of our old selves, hell no we aren't going to stop saying it. Just because you can't see how similar it is and how we've moved on from it doesn't mean you aren't like us. Even at the very least, if we're wrong and going to hell and you are right and never abandon the faith....you still remind us of how we used to be. We have just become fallen heathens, apparently. 

 

You can't eliminate bias completely, no, but you can face it and attempt to reject it as opposed to using it as an excuse to stay mired in irrational, dense, and uncritical thinking.

 

Finally, you assume we "trust" science. I, as an agnostic, find science to be just as unreliable sometimes. Formal logic doesn't really change, it's been the same for a loooong time now. Irrational thinking and logical fallacies are still a thing, bro.

 

 

*double sigh* I'll just drop the sacrifice thing, it seems you are never going to come to terms with this. Nothing was sacrificed, nothing paid the price for anything. He doesn't love you and likely doesn't exist.

 

I suppose a 40 year sentence for "many frustrations" makes sense to someone who also sees hell as reasonable. Good luck with that.

 

Then I guess he shouldn't tell us not to lie if he compels it. How does anyone know the truth from a lie if god could make someone lie at will? Free will my ass.

 

Sure I did, if you want to behave immaturely about it. I told you there are way bigger issues I would "argue about" and you did the same shit I called you on earlier. You ignore the main point, that there are WAY HUGER problems in the bible worth arguing over, and you picked an inconsequential point and did the whole "you started it" bit. I told you this. This is likely how you read the bible and further demonstrates how unreliably you exegete the biblical texts. 

 

You're continually missing my whole goddamn point. WHY must I pick a verse out of the NT? Why? What has changed about God from the Old Testament? You are trying to force me to focus on newer gospels that try to explain away the old gospels, but if God commanded it in the OT, what changed? I will not "follow your rule" and only pick from the new testament, because god is unchanging, according to your bible, and would therefore still be pleased by it today. I guess that just depends on you definition of command. 

 

Deuteronomy 20:10-12: "When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city." The verse goes on to talk about how all the men are to be put to the sword and how the women "may be taken for themselves." How nice of god. I realize you may notice that this chapter has to do with war, but we don't take current civilians as slaves during war, so what gives?

 

The "2+2" reference was me pointing out that, while both verses are ultimately wrong because "2+2=4," you have verses that directly give two different answers that cannot be misinterpreted. So, for one example (of many):

 

2 Kings 8:26
Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king...

 

2 Chronicles 22:2
Ahaziah was forty-two years old when he became king....

 

 

I am sorry to be an ass, but this is such a pet peeve of mine. "Irregardless" is just not a word. It negates itself since "regardless" means "without paying attention to the present situation," so irregardless would mean exactly the opposite of what you are trying to say. 

 

No, I didn't know that.

 

If I remind you of you, then  you should turn to Christ and not abandon Him.   Correct?    Oh........... so I don't remind you of me.  I understand.

 

No, you're not sorry.

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh, my faith insults your intelligence?    How sad.  But then that is what God intended.  

 

No, it is reliable to others who come by faith.   It is not reliable to those who come by intellect.   That must hurt.  Your intellect plays no role.  Ouch.

 

Man can discover truths of creation.   Because God has created.   But man cannot know God by science.   Because science seeks knowledge outside of God.  

 

My mind is closed to God.  I know God created the earth and universe.  You don't.  Thus I am close minded to you.  You offer 'theories', hypothesis,  which you believe but don't  know.  Sort of like you hope.  Sort of like you place 'faith' in.  Oh my.  Are you placing faith in science?

 

I have no problem with gravity.  When one jumps out of an 8 story building he falls.   I have a problem when science says we know gravity so God must not exist.  

 

So, my response will be nothing but an excuse?  You have prepared your readers to accept anything I say as an 'excuse'.   Very manipulative.   And expected.

 

Stranger

 

 

Look, I've been sarcastic with you and I'm sorry for it. You have frustrated me deeply with your circular logic and, what appears to be, a complete lack of consideration for what we say. In my mind, christian or not, these types of discussions should include deep reflection on other peoples' viewpoints and, when it seems like that doesn't happen, it feels disrespectful. But I was a bit snarky back and I apologize for that. Your responses are reflecting a growing defensiveness that is unnecessary and will hinder progress for us both.

 

There are actually many people here who will likely disagree with me on this, but I don't think belief in "god" and belief in "christianity" is mutually exclusive. You keep talking about a character that actually could exist in some form, but it is specifically christianity's god that I take issue with. Have you considered looking into the god you believe in versus how he is actually represented in Scripture? Could it be possible that something is out there, it's just not the man-made written narrative? Can you just acknowledge that this could be true? I don't think you have to stop believing in a god, it's really taking a harder look at christianity's history and mythological influences. If a god does exist, he (or she) could feasibly do whatever he/she wants and I couldn't say shit about it. But this christian god is peddled as all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving, all-justice, all-mercy.....the antithesis of evil. The behavior as recorded in the bible doesn't match up. What are your thoughts on this? 

 

You seem to think that we have made "science" or "reason" or "intellect" our "idol" but this isn't the case for everyone. When I was initially deconverting, I told myself that I was glorifying god by using principles of rationality and reason that he'd created. I was using the brain he gave me, my inquisitive nature created by him, to look for better answers to defend and glorify him. I don't understand, since I have told you that faith can be a good thing, why you so fiercely disapprove of "intellect." You use your intellect to defend your beliefs, why should we not do the same?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am curious how you respond to the holy quran, since you are using blasphemous scripture at us. Allah, may he be praised, has some words for Jesus (peace be upon him) and they disagree with your verses. If your yahweh inspired your verses and my Allah inspired mine, how should I figure out who's telling the truth?

004-158a.png

004-158b.png
[4:158] And their saying, ‘We did kill the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah;’ whereas they slew him not, nor crucified him, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified; and those who differ therein are certainly in a state of doubt about it; they have no definite knowledge thereof, but only follow a conjecture; and they did not convert this conjecture into a certainty"

 

Are you muslim?

 

Your koran is nothing but heresy.   It distorts the truths of the Bible. This was muhammad's intentions at the outset.  A wannabe.   

 

Believe whoever you like.

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Are you muslim?

 

Your koran is nothing but heresy.   It distorts the truths of the Bible. This was muhammad's intentions at the outset.  A wannabe.   

 

Believe whoever you like.

 

Stranger

 

How do you know this though? One "holy book" says Jesus rose from the dead, the other "holy book" says it was a trick. How can I tell without using reason against both?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
 

 

Oh, my faith insults your intelligence?    How sad.  But then that is what God intended.

 

Not at all. Again you are not reading properly.

 

 

No, it is reliable to others who come by faith.   It is not reliable to those who come by intellect.   That must hurt.  Your intellect plays no role.  Ouch.

 

Muslims have faith, they find yours unreliable, and you find theirs unreliable despite faith for both of you having the same definition. Belief in something without evidence.

 

 

Man can discover truths of creation.

 

You have yet to demonstrate something was created by your God

 

 

Because God has created.

 

Mere assertion - back it up without using circular reasoning

 

 

But man cannot know God by science.   Because science seeks knowledge outside of God. 

 

Some Christian scientists disagree with you, They find god in science - what is your response to them?

 

 

My mind is closed to God.  I know God created the earth and universe.  You don't.  Thus I am close minded to you.  You offer 'theories', hypothesis,  which you believe but don't  know.  Sort of like you hope.  Sort of like you place 'faith' in.  Oh my.  Are you placing faith in science?

 

No, faith is belief without requiring evidence. Science provides evidence for its explanations - no faith required. You are starting to build a straw man of my position regarding science - you should resit the temptation. You don't even need belief in science, you accept conclusions based on evidence provided.

 

I think you are confusing knowledge with deeply held beliefs. Basically if you can't show it, then you don't know it. And having words in a book is not knowing. That's believing. Strong belief to be sure, but you don't know.

 

 

 

I have no problem with gravity.  When one jumps out of an 8 story building he falls.   I have a problem when science says we know gravity so God must not exist.  

 

Science does not say God does not exist. What it does do is say this story in this book doesn't match what we see in reality. One can then form the conclusion that one of them is wrong. Either reality is deceiving you, or the book is. And since claims in the book cannot be backed up with evidence its more rational to accept reality

 

 

So, my response will be nothing but an excuse?  You have prepared your readers to accept anything I say as an 'excuse'.   Very manipulative.   And expected.

 

I admit, that was cheeky of me, but I have posted that challenge time and again to Christians and the excuses flood in... so I pre-empted you there. I apologise, I somewhat poisoned the well.

 

I will reissue the challenge without the bit at the end - please respond:

 

"On the other hand your evidence is faith, which you cannot demonstrate even to a fluid degree. Try this one for size:

 

"I tell all of you with certainty, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you." (Matthew)

 

and nothing will be impossible for you."

 

Nothing Stranger, nothing impossible for you.

 

So video yourself moving a mountain and you will have a mountain of evidence I will believe...."

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I didn't intend to wade into this conversation, because I see how futile it is. But I have just one question for @Stranger Why is it so difficult for you to just admit that your presupposition in this whole thread is one which follows dogma, that God must exist, that Jesus must exist, that all the teachings of Christianity must be true, and therefore any other perspectives are secondary and of no consequence. You got halfway there with insulting all of the information Citsonga provided. This is what people have been talking about when they talk about having bias. Btw I'm not only posting this for you Stranger, but for all the lurkers out there who are following this thread. Don't start an intellectual conversation when you refuse to even consider the points of the other side. 

 

God does exist.   Jesus does exist.  The teachings of Christianity are true.   Yes, any other beliefs, are rejected by me.  Note I said 'beliefs'.   

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I am willing to say, "Stranger could be correct about Jesus, the bible, religion." I mean really, he could be correct. I just choose not to accept his religion because I think it's false, and run by fear. But I am willing to verbalize the possibility that I am wrong.

 

I would actually value Stranger's words if he could at least verbalize that he may be wrong. Someone who is never wrong, be it Stranger or Jesus, is suspicious and I don't put my trust in them. Turn or burn doesn't sell it to me. It's like a used car salesman telling me, "Check out this baby. She runs like a top!" Yeah, right. There's always something 'wrong' with something. We've ALREADY worshiped Jesus and we discovered along the way lots of things that were wrong with Christianity. We've been on both sides. The non-belief side is better.

 

Here's a fun cult link to compare and contrast Stranger's interactions so far, or your own experience with the Christian organization (where you see the words 'group/leader' , replace that with Jesus Christ):

https://www.familiesagainstcultteachings.org/Cult-Education/Cult-Warning-Signs/

 

As to God and Christ, I am not wrong.   Your value of my words is immaterial to me.

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Screw it, I pinned it. This topic has been so revealing and instructive I think many will benefit from it. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

As to God and Christ, I am not wrong.   Your value of my words is immaterial to me.

 

Stranger

So what are you doing here?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Very good link. Clearly, my church was very much a cult despite saying otherwise (very suspicious).

 

This is a long thread, so this may have already been done, but I want to pose a question to Stranger:

 

How did you come to learn about Jesus Christ? Do you remember explicitly how you came to know about him, or has it seemed like the knowledge has always been with you because your parents have always believed and it was just always around in your household growing up? If that is so, have you ever considered that maybe your family (or whomever taught you about the bible) was faulty in their teaching? That they did not know what they were telling you? No matter how sincere it may have been?

 

Maybe a futile attempt, but I did not see this avenue explored yet.

 

I have said before, God places His people among His people.   

 

There never was a time when I didn't believe in God.   Never.   

 

My family was as faithful in their teaching as they could be.  They knew God and taught me as best they could.   There was nothing faulty in their teaching.   They were limited but not faulty. 

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Look, I've been sarcastic with you and I'm sorry for it. You have frustrated me deeply with your circular logic and, what appears to be, a complete lack of consideration for what we say. In my mind, christian or not, these types of discussions should include deep reflection on other peoples' viewpoints and, when it seems like that doesn't happen, it feels disrespectful. But I was a bit snarky back and I apologize for that. Your responses are reflecting a growing defensiveness that is unnecessary and will hinder progress for us both.

 

There are actually many people here who will likely disagree with me on this, but I don't think belief in "god" and belief in "christianity" is mutually exclusive. You keep talking about a character that actually could exist in some form, but it is specifically christianity's god that I take issue with. Have you considered looking into the god you believe in versus how he is actually represented in Scripture? Could it be possible that something is out there, it's just not the man-made written narrative? Can you just acknowledge that this could be true? I don't think you have to stop believing in a god, it's really taking a harder look at christianity's history and mythological influences. If a god does exist, he (or she) could feasibly do whatever he/she wants and I couldn't say shit about it. But this christian god is peddled as all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving, all-justice, all-mercy.....the antithesis of evil. The behavior as recorded in the bible doesn't match up. What are your thoughts on this? 

 

You seem to think that we have made "science" or "reason" or "intellect" our "idol" but this isn't the case for everyone. When I was initially deconverting, I told myself that I was glorifying god by using principles of rationality and reason that he'd created. I was using the brain he gave me, my inquisitive nature created by him, to look for better answers to defend and glorify him. I don't understand, since I have told you that faith can be a good thing, why you so fiercely disapprove of "intellect." You use your intellect to defend your beliefs, why should we not do the same?

 

Don't worry over your sarcasm.   I don't.  

 

Christianity's God is the only God.   These are my thoughts.

 

Science is an idol to those who seek to use it to say there is no God. 

 

Intellect and spirit are not the same.  Those of God have the mind of the Spirit of God.

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So what are you doing here?

 

The same thing you are.

 

Stranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
 

God does exist.   Jesus does exist.  The teachings of Christianity are true.   Yes, any other beliefs, are rejected by me.  Note I said 'beliefs'.   

 

Mere assertions with no evidence provided and a confession of not being open to any other opinion but his own.

 

This is what religious brain rot looks like.

 

 

There never was a time when I didn't believe in God.   Never.  

 

If anyone wants to know what religious indoctrination looks like it, Stranger is the living definition of it. Brought up to believe nothing else, claims absolute knowledge, rejects everything that does not conform to his belief's. THAT is religious indoctrination.

 

 

 

My family was as faithful in their teaching as they could be.  They knew God and taught me as best they could.   There was nothing faulty in their teaching.   They were limited but not faulty.

 

The arrogance - his family so perfect that they were not faulty. Even your fellow Christians would disagree.

 

 

Screw it, I pinned it. This topic has been so revealing and instructive I think many will benefit from it. 

 

 

Oh heck yes. Very very revealing. The best example of religious indoctrination that I have seen on this site.

 

Ironhorse doesn't come close to this level of indoctrination, ignorance, and arrogance. Ironhorse at least has the decency to say some things he doesn't know and is just doing his best to understand it.

 

Such is the effect of Stranger on me that I feel like giving Ironhorse a hug for being so harsh on him early on :D 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The same thing you are.

 

Stranger

 

 

Really? Doesn't seem like it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

What is 'reasonable' to you and others who reject Christ is not reasonable to me.  

 

My faith does not contradict me or God.  It contradicts you.   Big deal.   It's to be expected.

 

Don't talk about faith til you know what you are talking about.  

 

Stranger

Ha! Your arrogance is stunning. I know what faith is. I've seen it and did my best to go with it myself. Until the evidence conveying your god's non-existence was too overwhelming to deny. Putting it on me as if I never tried to see the Christian side as truth. I did.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Don't worry over your sarcasm.   I don't.  

 

Christianity's God is the only God.   These are my thoughts.

 

Science is an idol to those who seek to use it to say there is no God. 

 

Intellect and spirit are not the same.  Those of God have the mind of the Spirit of God.

 

Stranger

 

I'm not "worried," I was trying to show you respect and admit when I was wrong. I recognize that you only "repent" later and it's all good, like the get of jail free card that it is, but I wanted to do apologize for having been inconsiderate of you. As annoyed as I am right now, that apology still stands. 

 

You are acting so frustratingly disrespectful. No "I'm sorry too," no "I'll try to convey respect better," no "my bad, wasn't trying to come off like that," no anything. There is no logical discourse, or even basic discourse. There is no acknowledging that you could be wrong, no giving a legitimate and researched argument. No, "hmm I hadn't thought of thought, let me look it up and get back to you," no "I can see why this could be frustrating," nothing. No "give." It's almost unbelievable, like I wouldn't be surprised at this point if this was some kind of joke. Furthermore, I will grant you that you are (while still reminding us of our old circular reasoning and blind beliefs) not like us in many ways. I gave a crap as a christian and I give a crap now. 

 

When you don't care enough to actually try to defend your god or your beliefs, when you don't give a crap about your witness, you are only doing harm by your religion and showing other christians who might be doubting the kind of irrationality and attitude necessary to be a sincere believer. You will find no converts here which is the only reason I can conceive for why you'd be on an "ex-christian" site unless you have unvoiced doubts.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.