Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 07/21/2019 in Posts

  1. 5 points
    Reminds me of one of my favorite memes: ”They say money can’t buy happiness, but it can buy a jet ski - and have you ever seen a sad person on a jet ski?”
  2. 3 points
    After reading, I am not seeing how the responses you have received are flawed.
  3. 3 points
    This post has been a long time coming, I feel it to be a necessity in order for me to truly move on. I joined this site June of 2013 and it served as a new community after severing ties with my church circles. Over time, I've talked to some incredible people, some I've had the privilege of meeting in person. I've even found relationships here, twice, something that I didn't expect from a forum of this nature. That's not to say that I've gotten along with everyone but that's inevitable when you gather many individuals with separate life experiences all in one place. Many who were with me on this journey are now long gone from the site and thus, perhaps it's time I follow in their footsteps. There are several reasons why I'm choosing this route. I see this site as a sort of medicine, a kind or treatment for people who have been negatively affected by Christianity. I'm at the point where I hardly think about it in a daily basis, the days where I was a church drone are in the distant past now as well as any residual emotions that came along with them. I think it is safe to say that I have completed the recovery cycle and have moved on to other things, other groups, other interests, etc. There is no sense in continuing to take the medicine if you aren't afflicted with the condition it was intended to heal. There is nothing more that I can gain from this site or contribute. Sure, I might encourage new non believers here every once in a while but there are those here who feel more passionate about it and thus will do a much better job than me. On top of this, an ideological rift has formed between me and the majority of the members here. I don't think these differences are reconcilable, the tribal nature of humanity precludes that from ever happening. I suppose that I've found my tribe elsewhere at this point. I would like to thank everyone who recently commented on the thread where my father passed away. I much appreciate the advice and encouragement. The same goes for everyone who is still reading me and have done the same in other instances. Right now I will reach out and say my goodbyes to some of the members here via PM. Once they all reply, I will ask Margee or one of the mods to permanently delete my profile. Anyways, that is all I have to say for now.
  4. 3 points
    If all of those writers were, in fact, inspired by the same omniscient god, then it stands to reason that said god would have known about Bob's fishing trip. It further stands to reason, that any of those writers who wrote about Bob's fishing trip, would be able to agree on the details, having gotten them from the same source, to wit: said omniscient god. Also, I studied both exegesis and hermeneutics for four years and hold a degree with a minor in biblical studies. STOP insulting our intelligence.
  5. 3 points
    I have to agree with the above. The presuppositionalism is a dead end road. It's not evidence based and can't prove anything. The gigs up, basically. 5 pages of opportunity to come in strong with hard evidence should have left plenty of opportunity to do so. But no hard evidence was provided. Newbies, lurker's and whoever else can read through and contemplate the whole thing. If some new apologist comes forward and wants to continue on where Luth has failed, then I will hear them out unless they too devolve to mindless trolling and trying to aggravate members.
  6. 3 points
    I pegged poster LuthAMF as a narcissistic little shit in a post in this thread on May 30, 2019, identified him as a TULIP wannabe (i.e., Calvinist) on June 5, 2019, and commented in the few subsequent posts about his disingenuousness, projection and other things. His posts have certainly served as an example to members and lurkers alike of how presuppositional religious beliefs can foster serious emotional, psychological and mental dysfunctions. I think that lesson has been well demonstrated. And let's not forget Josh's mature and rational attempt to engage poster LuthAMF in the parallel "informal debate" thread, from which we were given only more of poster LuthAMF's hubris, discordance and bleating. Allowing him to continue to expose his empty suit, with attendant vacuous vitriol, focused hate and irrational nonsense is not going to help members or lurkers any further, and is only going to foster a deepening of his unfortunate malady. For his own good, he should simply go away. Yes, ban him.
  7. 3 points
    Absolutely. I'm particularly amazed at how he created Lucifer and the fallen angels, and then created hell for them, and then decided to throw everybody else into hell except for you and your 4 YouTube subscribers. The sheer stupidity of god's "creation" truly staggers the imagination. Here are a few more amazing "creations" of god's: https://www.popsci.com/human-eye-parasites/ https://www.medicinenet.com/necrotizing_fasciitis/article.htm https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump https://www.chop.edu/conditions-diseases/osteosarcoma
  8. 3 points
    Hello everyone, It has been a few months since I've discovered this site and for the first time didn't feel alone in my frustration with the christian faith. I was familiar with different denominations. From megachurches to pentecostals. As a teen I simply wanted to understand the faith before choosing to be born again. But I was mentally weak and gave in to the pressure. With pain in my heart I consoled myself with so much punishment that would somehow make me a better person. I doubted my conversion because it wasn't my will. All I wanted was assurance for the end of my days. All I wanted was comfort but it never seemed to come my way. I watched everyone find consolance, meet Jesus. I was simply counting my days. My life was not that awesome, all the things I loved I had put it away. From music to expression, my curiosity which was endless, I made my life an oppression, my darkest pits seemed bottomless. I saw a light in my obsession for everything that made life better. I saw a life that could only be lived once. If only I knew better. Better than when I was 17. Now I am 23. I don't want the bible to be a good thing, a helper. I don't want my examples (idols) to say the bible helped them. I don't want the bible to be the truth. I don't want the bible to show me my identity. I don't want the bible to tell me what to do. I don't want the bible to represent true beauty. Because to me, the bible wasn't helpful nor a good thing. The bible made people's spirits enemies. The bible told me my thoughts&feelings weren't true. The bible told me I was unworthy. The bible didn't inspire me, it told me what to do. The bible made me fear my true beauty.
  9. 3 points
    First of all, welcome, Christopherhays! I hope you’ll share your story with us in due course, but since you started with a question, I’ll give it my best shot. No, I don’t think you should try to deconvert your family, as much as you - and I - would love to see them follow in your footsteps. We can’t deconvert anybody. Lots of people come here and we do help them through the deconversion process, but that can only happen when they’ve taken the first steps themselves and have begun to question things. If a believer does not have some openness to reasoned arguments, then any deconversion attempts are likely to fall on deaf ears or even to drive them deeper into faith. What you can do, depending on the situation, is quietly and politely defend your unbelief and answer questions. Do not be patronizing and adopt an “I was so stupid for believing too but now I know better” approach. And above all, Don’t be a Dick (my personal First Commandment). When a Christian has a loved one “fall away”, one of the things they have to deal with is the idea that he or she is now heading for Hell. That is likely to challenge anybody’s faith to some extent at least, without you having to say a word: could a loving god really send/allow Christopherhays to burn in Hell simply for not believing in Him? It helps if you don’t fit the common Christian stereotype of an agnostic or atheist: somebody whose life enters a downward spiral of drugs, alcohol and depression because that’s what happens when you turn away from the Lord, right? So you should take care of yourself, get comfortable with your new world-View and let them see that you are just as happy (hopefully happier) without Jesus as you were with him. That will make people wonder. And if at some point somebody takes you aside privately to ask you questions, you'll be ready to explain your journey. Just my take. Good luck and keep us posted!
  10. 3 points
    Nope. No evidence for any gods; therefore, IMO there has never been a "true word of God" in the entire history of this planet. I read the Bible over 50 years ago, without any interference -- just inquisitive me and your alleged deity. It never resonated with me, never appeared to be anything more than fables from a long-dead culture that bore little to no resemblance to my reality in Canada in the 1960s. If your god was trying to get a message through to me, the only part that got through was Matthew 25:35-40, and that sentiment is not exclusive to Christianity.
  11. 3 points
    Inappropriate comment removed and poster warned. I am also going to try to delete copies of her text which appear in others' posts. If the system won't let me and/or I miss something, please please please edit your own comments if you quoted our latest invading Authentic Christian Believer who obviously chose to ignore the very few rules we have here. Thanks, Buffettphan
  12. 3 points
    @buffettphan @florduh @Joshpantera The above quote poster, though no doubt meaning well, is pushing their christian viewpoint - not the support Hole-In-My-Heart is looking for I think. @Georgia Not sure what goes through your mind when somebody makes a post the OP did, but the fact that they are on an Ex-Christian site might indicate they are not looking for more religious waffle. Imagine if someone goes to a christian forum asking for prayer and I turn up and tell them that prayer is a load of bullshit. That wouldn't be very mindful of me would it? @hole_in_my_heart You appear to be struggling with your religion I do have much to say about what's in the bible, especially Genesis, but only if you are interested in an atheist viewpoint. However assuming you still believe in God and still want to attend Church I would recommend you find a LBGTQ friendly one. They exist... depending on your location. Staying in your current environment is unhealthy. You need to look after you. All the best
  13. 3 points
    Wow! Your father really seems like a piece of work! And I don't mean that in a good way..... I sure hope that you can get through the situation. I'm sure that you will. You need to put some good distance between you and the control-freak!
  14. 2 points
    Myrkhoos, From my own experience, you may be looking for that safe place again. Finding out that Christianity may be a lie is the same thing as finding out that your spouse cheated on you or somebody died and you have a hard time accepting the facts. For instance many people will stay in an abusive relationship because of the fear of moving into another area of their life which is the unknown. It is extremely scary for many people to have to start all over again and go in another direction of their life. So many times it is easier to stay in a situation where things are known, even though they may not be good for that person, they still want to stay and remain in a "safe" area. Even though it is not a safe area to be in, the brain will convince you that it is so. It is a known fact in Neuroscience that the brain does not like change, that is why any habit or brainwashing of any kind is so hard to break. At the very end of me leaving the church for the very last time, I had found a church that their Doctrine was all about Grace and was probably the easiest Church to belong to because this Doctrine accepted the whole entire world as being saved under Jesus blood. These people basically do not even believe in hell. But the confusion still remained in me because the Bible clearly stated that they were saved and unsaved people. You could try joining one of these types of churches but if you are anything like me you will still be confused at the whole Doctrine. I personally had to continue going until I could not go any longer and knew that I needed help in finding out the truth about Christianity and the doctrine that came from the Bible. My uncle belongs to a church for many years now and doesn't even believe in God. He goes because he loves the music and the community of the church. You could even try that for a while and see how it goes. In the meantime you must realize that you are probably grieving something that you have believed in for a long time. It took me a long time to finally let go and realize that the Bible was a man written book. I have been posting here for 10 years and sometimes it still hurts that I believed what the church told me. Keep coming back here. Keep posting all your questions. Continue to read and investigate Christianity. We are all here for you. Big hug for you today.
  15. 2 points
    I got about a third into Dawkins Delusion and gave up. He, in the end ISTM, is attacking one section of Christianity and does himself no service. And too strident for my liking. As for formally defecting from the RCC....you will know best what to do. But it reminds me of an incident at the birth of one of our children (many years ago). The local Anglican priest visited her during which visit she told him that she was a Congregationalist. His reply was revealing: 'Never mind, dear'. An aside (is it?!): just read about a man being raised from the dead and another having 17000 demons cast out of him in a pentecostal meeting. You see? What craziness and manipulation some churches are into.
  16. 2 points
    @ag_NO_stic, for what it's worth, I miss having you around here more often. I get everything you wrote, and it's good that you are ready move on. You know where to find me if you want to talk.
  17. 2 points
    I'm still here for a bit longer till I reply to some messages that I've been sent and wrap up all conversations. I understand that the recovery cycle is different for everyone. However, my personal advice is be aware of when each step of the process ends and you're ready to move on to the next. I wen't through an angry phase for example where I bashed Christianity and started many arguments/debates because of that anger. Eventually, I reached a point where I wasn't compelled to do that anymore because those feelings subsided but still did it anyways because I wanted approval and acceptance from my atheist community. Do not fall into that trap, it will impede your progress. Do not rehash that which you have moved on from. Most importantly, do not trade one set of dogmas for another, you will find many atheist hold on to other ideologies with the same adherence as they did religion. That's all I can say, good luck to both of you and thank you for those responses.
  18. 2 points
    *Cough* Flat earth *cough* I know, I couldn't resist. There I was enjoying the video and they take us to the view of earth from the ISS... and as a commenter said - well at least the crew up there can laugh their arses off at all the flat earthers below. I wonder if they have internet? They could watch the latest flat earther video then shit themselves laughing for entertainment For a thorough tour of the ISS see here. Well worth the watch imo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGP6Y0Pnhe4
  19. 2 points
    I understand you want respond to this, but may you at least read. And try to understand. It is an understandable human urge to want to defend your words and actions, not wanting to change or admit wrongs. I will not get into that of your posts. But you calling out someone who has suffered abuse and telling them they are acting just their abuser is disgusting. It can send the victim spiraling, cause a panic attack or worsen depression. I suggest you not say such things to someone again. That is all.
  20. 2 points
    Technically, this is true. In about three billion years, the Andromeda Galaxy will collide with the Milky Way Galaxy and merge with it, probably with substantial disruption of the existing solar systems in this galaxy. And if that doesn't take out the Earth, wait another two billion years. Our sun is fated to become a red giant, and its boundaries will expand beyond the Earth's orbit and fry this cute little planet to a crisp. Eventually, and through whatever means, the atoms in our bodies will become part of something else that is not us, something that is no longer on this planet. As I see it, this is inevitable. Georgia, just to remind you, this is an Ex-Christian site. Scripture no longer holds any authority for the vast majority of us. I, for one, believe that your god is fictional and that life after death is impossible.
  21. 2 points
    If the earth was flat I could listen to Logical Fallacy's FM radio stations in the USA. But I cant hear them from the USA. In reality, because the earth is generally a spherical shape, you cant listen to any VHF radio station for more than about 30 miles because of the curvature of the earth. Radio waves of that wavelength punch through the atmosphere and continue out into space. I watched the International Space Station cross my sky a few weeks ago as predicted by a satellite tracking website (n2yo.com). It went from the southwest horizon , right over head and disappeared to the northeast. It orbits roughly every 90 minutes. If the earth was flat I would always be able to see it. I talk on amateur radio satellites that orbit the earth every 90 minutes. For approximately 15 minutes I can talk through the satellite up to about 3000 miles on a predictable basis when the rest of the time all I can do on this VHF frequency is talk around town. If the earth was flat these satellites would be continuously usable. They would always be overhead. But they arent. They fly from horizon to horizon then disappear. Because the earth is a sphere. If the earth was flat the space station would have to cross the earth then somehow teleport back to the starting spot to give the illusion of orbiting a spherical earth. Would this make sense? Why is the horizon so close by? Why can't I just look down towards the south and see New Zealand from the USA? Must be smog or something. ISS webcam orbiting the earth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4993sBLAzGA The radio stuff may not make much unless you are a radio nerd..but I threw it out there anyway. I'm trying to make science points with Logical Fallacy too...lolz.
  22. 2 points
    Thanks good answers ! As for actually doing something for someone, in some cases not possible ( because of distance, they are elsewhere, or you just can't do anything) , but yes, that would be a good response. " can I do anything for you?" instead of prayers. That's good.
  23. 2 points
    She's really smart, just like Calvin's dad:
  24. 2 points
    Bravo, that's a big step! I came out as agnostic (was unwilling to use atheist due to all the negative stereotypes attached) over a year ago and it complicated family relationships. Things have calmed down somewhat since then but I'm having to deal with toxic behavior within the family partially due to religion, which totally encourages the us vs them mentally and isolating people emotionally. I just sent my family a letter expressing how the behavior has made me feel. The important thing is that you try to retain open and honest communication. Sometimes there's only so much of relationships you can salvage when religion influences behavior.
  25. 2 points
    Hi Leo, good to hear from you again. I was contemplating the immature nature of the bible god last night since I'm going to be with family next week at a funeral. He really is a whiny little brat that likes to kill, and the only way to placate him is with lots of blood. Then he justifies all his petulant tantrums with "Hey, I'm holy. ...bitch". Most humans that we label holy tend to be super kind and good, not set people on fire for some twisted sense of justice. Actually, a lot of the ancient gods were like that. People wanted to explain the randomness of why shit happens to good people and such, I suppose. Medusa was once a beautiful virgin in service to Athena (goddess of war). Poseidon (god of the ocean) saw her, raped her to spite Athena, and left her there in the temple. Athena saw that she was no longer a virgin (and technically Poseidon's wife now) and booted her out and cursed her to be hideous. The story of the Odyssey was Homer's way of saying that without the gods, man is nothing. So the cult mindset has been around in many forms for a long time.
  26. 1 point
    How about I introduce PA as an inherent part of EVERY christian variety of denomination? And here's the basis for the claim. There isn't such a thing as any christian denomination or non-denominational christian believer who DOESN"T presuppose the truth of the bible, while claiming the truth of the bible. Because there exists zero confirmation for establishing the truth of these biblical claims we've outlined - a god exists, that god or gods altogether created the universe and earth, the god gives special revelation to humans and inspires biblical writings, etc., etc. Technically, according to the link, not all apologist's are PA. There are evidential and other varieties listed. But I beg to differ with the wiki link in the above outlined way. Because it doesn't matter what type of apologetic's is used, at the end of the day all of the major truth claims oriented around the bible (listed above) funnel down to presuppositional foundations according to what I've outlined. That's literally where the debate currently sits. I've asked for evidence. What I've received are PA responses for several pages instead of evidence, as if presupposition is substantial evidence in and of itself. Dave saw what has been going on and pointed it out in the side gallery. I then took in the apologetic style and compared it to predestination which is why we're discussing it here at the moment. I did not grow up technically knowing or understanding PA, but nevertheless, and without the label, that's basically what I was doing and what I believed. The bible proves it's own claims, the bible altogether, through christianity, is automatically superior to all other world views and religions. I thought that poking holes at other world views demonstrated the superiority of the bible. I was greatly mistaken. And that's why I wager that all christians are presuppositional because there is no other option on the table available to anyone. If there were another option, why has it not been offered? And further more, for heaven's sake, where is the alternative option that proves the bible without presupposing that it's true apriori? We could discuss here a bit and argue the point I'm making above if you prefer. And here everyone else can chime in if they disagree with me about this - a sort of ex-C peer review if you will. Maybe the point seems too radical? Feel free to chime in.
  27. 1 point
    On reading this for the second time I realise that we have both independently come to the same conclusion on this topic. (I don't think we've ever discussed it). I am of the thought that the very concept of an absolute "no thing" could well be nonsensical. We have zero evidence this is even possible. Even Lawrence Krauss in the Universe from Nothing is not suggesting the universe could come from absolute nothing, but as you said, a quantum vacuum where particles can pop uncaused into existence. However a quantum vacuum is not nothing. The mere fact you are describing it indicates that it's not nothing. During my deep thinking during deconversion I applied this problem back even further to the concept of a God existing from nothing in nothing. I found the entire concept absurd. In order to solve the problem of a universe existing from nothing the theist proposes a being existing outside of 'anything'. This in itself is a contradictory idea. Try and conceive of nothing. I warrant you cannot, because whatever you conceive of consists of something. Maybe you just think of a great darkness. Well you've just described something! I completely agree with the statement that we have no reason to think nothing is even possible.
  28. 1 point
    There's no pressing need to explain Paul away. His existence has been questioned by some. It's interesting to look over. Some of the options are that Marcion, in the 2nd century, used journey's and material from the exploits of Apollonius of Tyana and that basically turned into "Paul." You have to read all of the theories to get a feel for what they entail. But Doherty and Carrier assume that there was an historical Paul, at least for the authentic Pauline epistles. And that the person had gnostic oriented belief's about a celestial figure. Because when you set aside the gospels and un-authentic Pauline Epistles that's pretty much what you're looking at. And there is evidence of some early christian beliefs that speak about a celestial arena and drama taking place up in the upper heavens. Again, you have to read through all of this material to get a feel for what the theories entail. But at the end of the day, Paul is non-contemporary writer any which way it's spun. He never professed to having met jesus personally on earth, or witnessed the trial or crucifixion himself. It's a guy writing well after the supposed fact about things he himself never witnessed and what amounts to hearsay reporting. I'd just stick to the facts with christians. Paul doesn't prove anything. He doesn't the prove the bible is true and he doesn't prove that the gospel jesus (something created after Paul btw) is historically true and accurate. The big issue here is that trying to find the real historical jesus ends up stripping down just about everything you think of as jesus. In the end we're facing some obscure guy, not really known by anyone at all lest a few followers, at best, who may have died with little attention paid to it at the time. Not by the Romans or Jews, according to documentation of the time. There's no trial records or anything to go by. Locating an historical jesus doesn't do the bible any justice at all. That's what you should probably keep in mind talking with christians. And furthermore, as an aside, there may not even be a fixed historical figure at the core of it all. It could just as well be several different prophet types rolled into one for the sake of a story. The only honest answer would be to say, "I don't know if any of it is true or not." Because no one really does.....
  29. 1 point
    Confusticating is a favorite with Christian apologists. It gives them that ultra intelligent aura especially in a debate format. William Lane Craig loves that approach. Putting your finger on exactly what mistakes are being made can be much more difficult than showing how to arrive at the most sound conclusion. Then when you choose an audience to be half Christians you create what looks like a stimulating debate even if the quality of the answers are completely unequal. (Not used in that clip but another Christian favorite is name dropping - so and so who heads the department of such and such at such and such prestegious university wrote extensively on this complex subject and came to exactly the opposite conclusion that you are stating here. This is an excellent tactic for replying to audience questions following a debate.) Luckily tricks don't work nearly so well in a court setting where all the time necessary to present an argument and refute one is given (days in this case) so the creationest, masquerading as ID, were stunningly outmatched by the scientists presenting for evolution and consequently defeated and even reprimanded by the judge in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case. There is no truly logical supporting evidence for Christianity and the more fundamental the beliefs the more illogical they necessarily are.
  30. 1 point
    Hey, this is a funny yet scary article on Slate about the Christian nutters who are holding gatherings at the Trump International Hotel in DC and are holding Trump up as sent from God. Of course, a couple of their leaders are selling trinkets for up to $1144 that are "points of contact." This is worth a read: https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/07/trump-hotel-sacred-space-prophets.html?
  31. 1 point
    So, has Luth-ifer fallen from heaven?
  32. 1 point
    I'm boring. If you gave me a million dollars I'd pay my mortgage, renovate my house, and invest the rest.
  33. 1 point
    We're still not getting much of anywhere. Are we talking about the bible proving god exists or that an historical jesus existed in 1st century Palestine? We haven't taken issue with jesus yet, but in both cases it's up to the person making the positive claim to prove the claim. No, it's not up to anyone to prove that jesus didn't exist as an historical figure according to the gospel tales. That is an incredibly huge lie on your part. And it's yet another issue of uncertainty. Surprise everyone!!! The problem here is that we don't actually know IN ABSOLUTE TERMS, Luth Sidius! As for scripture, it's a mess. That's why we're here. Why have you made additional positive claims now, after all we've just discussed about the burden of proof for making positive claims, without bring forward your proof that, "Scripture itself bears the burden and does so successfully so we stand upon it." The NT starts off just horrible. Are you telling me that you want to fast forward and go there now? Would you like to start with Matthew as it's incorrectly arranged, start out with the Pauline Epistles in correct historical order and then read through in order to the best of our knowledge each gospel according to when scholarship can detect they might have been penned? You haven't shown me or anyone else reading, here or elsewhere at ex-C, what you are positively claiming "scripture has already proved." What are we supposed to make of such a statement coming from you? You have yet to prove any of it. Understand? Still unclear? People are literally waiting to see you prove any of it. Are you going to keep rattling around a make believe saber or prove something? That isn't proven at all. Do you have the jewish or roman court records of jesus execution in the first place? Contemporary to his execution? Contemporary historians making note of it who were writing in 1st century Palestine before 40 CE? What do you think you have that proves this? This is pure speculation on your part, oh Lord of the Dark arts. You are lying for the Lord as we speak. K-RAP-OLA. You use absolutes on a regular basis just like everyone else. That's sheer cowardice. Wisodom, knowledge and strength leads one to avoid making absolute claims about things which can not be established, "absolutely." Calling me a coward for taking a stronger position than you is laughable. I'm the one who called you into this debate. And I'm the one holding the spot light on you now. And I've told everyone that I have no absolute position on (1) the origin of the universe and earth or (2) the origins of life on earth. I don't believe that ancients creation myths reveal the truth of our origins. Nor do I assume that as of 2019 science has it completely figured out. This is the future, Luth. This is the sort of model of human being which operates completely immune to your proselytizing efforts, your attempts at spiritual and / or intellectual bullying with dishonesty, and most importantly your HALLOW claims and threats. People who can think for themselves, fact check anyone who makes extraordinary claims, and won't be bullied by superstitious narcissistic, self righteous and self important personalities like yourself. Are you drunk typing these nonsensical posts at me? This might be the most ignorant and ill conceived response you've post yet. Is this not embarrassing for you? I don't understand how someone can be this thick. So let me get this straight. Do YOU bear the burden of proof that the Hindu texts are NOT the word of Brahman because YOU don't believe the Hindu texts? I don't expect that you believe that Brahman is absolute, transcendent consciousness which informs the world and all things, do you? Or that Vishnu is a manifestation of Brahman? Or that ultimately we are all manifestations of Brahman, of an absolute consciousness referred to in Vedic tradtion and Advaita Vedanta and written about in ancient texts far older than the christian texts? It's written. People believe it. Hindu apologist's attempt to defend it. So that must be it? The Vedic tradition proves the Vedic tradition true then? Or are you just special pleading again only for you own personal beliefs? Your beliefs are proven true by your own preferred ancient texts? What are you saying? Maybe something in scripture might be true, therefore that equals a proof based on the ability to speculate? Speculation is NOT proof. Speculation about abiogenesis is not proof, it's speculation. Speculation about the book of Genesis isn't proof either, it's also speculation. And someone who tries taking speculation and claiming that's it's absolutely true, fails. You are failing miserably at providing credible evidence and proving your assertions in this dialogue. To be honest, Luth, you're sitting in the corner wearing a dunce cap at this point. Have you no shame? Good morning, btw.
  34. 1 point
    we have a Lamancha that gives a gallon a day, and a Nubian, that give about half. I don't know what to do with all this milk while I am not able to do things
  35. 1 point
    Hi and welcome to Ex-C, Offorrest I had my childhood stolen by the pentecostal cult and it still haunts me even now, some 30 odd years later. There's comfort in knowing that you're not alone...which is why I'm here. I get a lot more out of this site than I ever got from the f*ckin cult. Good that you're here
  36. 1 point
    I believe I can see why you are unhappy, at least in part.
  37. 1 point
    I understand you discomfort with praying for someone. If it helps, one definition of prayer is to humbly request something. It doesn't have to be religious. At least that's the way I rationalize it.
  38. 1 point
    Never underestimate religious folks.
  39. 1 point
    Hi everybody. I've been reading posts here for about a week and it's been so comforting to find like-minded people. Almost everyone in my life is Christian. My family is very very very religious. I started having questions about a year ago. I didn't understand who got to make the rules and why they were chosen. Why was it more important to be straight than it was to be kind? Why was is more important to be married for sex to happen, instead of a loving, respectful relationship. And so many other why's. Anyway today is my first post because my father told me that only God can helo me with my mental illness and no other treatment will work. He states so boldly about something he knows vokol about. (vokol is South African for jackshit). I am so angry. I am so tired. I can't believe how they refuse to see that my medication and therapy are what is working and not skipping meals and praying to a God who really isn't about answering sometimes. I am exhausted and somehow I still can't give up the hope that one day my mental illness will be seen as legitimate enough to be treated, the same way his hypertension is. Thank you so much to the creator of this site. This is so helpful. Christianity left me disillusioned, but I finally have power again. I am the God of my life.
  40. 1 point
    You must not be a real christian, then, if you're using opinion instead of hermeneutics and exegesis. Welcome to hell.
  41. 1 point
  42. 1 point
    Christian apologetics: The art of waving away the argument of any interlocutor. You can get degrees and PhD's in this stuff!
  43. 1 point
    I can one up myself: The Bible said Call no man a fool Jesus said "Fools and slow of heart" Jesus is breaking his fathers command... no wait he's breaking his own command.... wait or is it his ghosts command? Who knows, we are but fools.
  44. 1 point
    Are you sure a horticulturalist would do this? I'm pretty sure, unless there is some color-blindness in the mix, that we could agree on the color of the grass. As it is I have to read what you have written and interpret it to understand it in a way that means that the grass may be green in color, which I may take mean the grass is healthy, but horticulturalist may be able to tell me otherwise. Which goes back the original point of clarity in communications. It doesn't always happen but at least in an interactive forum we can ask questions in order to, hopefully, get more clarification but the gods aren't quite so accommodating. mwc
  45. 1 point
    You are attempting to conflate truism with truth. That everyone can talk is not truth, as your example demonstrates. That people do tend to find some means of communication is truth; because it doesn't matter if a person is in Ukraine or Vietnam, he or she will usually fine some way of communicating. The "law of god" is not truth because there are many people for whom it does not work or apply. "The earth revolves around the sun" is as true in Afghanistan as it is in Iceland. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" is accepted as truth in America; not so much in India. The idea that there weren't as many words in Moses' time is silly. Certainly, there were not words associated with computers or automotive travel; but there were still plenty enough words for an omniscient god to have conveyed his meaning adequately, had such a god existed (and, had such a god not have had such difficulty saying what he meant).
  46. 1 point
    To suit your perspective, I should be honest and admit that I'm just pissed at Santa because I didn't get the pony I asked for when I was seven. And don't even get me started on the Tooth Fairy (aka Cunty McCunt-Face). That bitch still owes me money for teeth that fell out of my head 30 fucking years ago.
  47. 1 point
    Notice how poster LuthAMF demands those who he perceives as disagreeing with him to guess at what his "sound Christian doctrine" is precisely, state it and then refute it. Normal rational discourse requests that LuthAMF state what his "sound Christian doctrine" actually is, to him at least, and then support it. In 237 posts on this forum he has utterly failed to do so, despite repeated requests. Once again, this one is an empty suit...full of himself, and full of shit. I could go on, but he is not worth the time.
  48. 1 point
    Oh goody. We get to explain the difference between evolution (speciation through natural selection) and abiogenesis (the origins of life) again for the fuckteenth time.
  49. 1 point
    That was awesome, TABA. Glad to hear Citsonga is not trading sexual favors to get his letters read. Haha! Btw - his letter to his parents really is pretty spectacular.
  50. 1 point
    I have no precise data, but I suspect BO's posts on ToT accounted for at least one-half of them in quantity and were responsible to 90% of the responses. Not bad for a shallow and irrational little shit. He should put that on his resumé.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.