Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by LogicalFallacy

  1. Interesting claim. Care to explain what he knows better and how you know that he knows better?
  2. Reread my post. Unicorn was a placeholder. You are dodging the question. I'll be more specific. Is there any metaphysical position I couldn't take on faith?
  3. Which is why I asked our Christian friend if there is any position that I couldn't take on faith.
  4. Quite clearly that guy didn't make you eat the dog poo in his backyard. Or clean up the fur. Or fill in the holes from digging. You know, all very well known lines of evidence to support the proposition that A dog walked through their back yard. Can you provide anything close to that for dog spelt backwards?
  5. So is there any position I couldn't take on faith? I could say I have faith unicorns exist. (You can insert any proposition you like in place of unicorn)
  6. What do you mean by faith? I've heard a dozen explanations so I want to make sure I understand what you mean by faith.
  7. You are discussing theology again. Theology already presupposes the proposition to be true. What evidence do you have that any of this is true? It's not as unique as you seem to think it is. There is a long history of humans thinking about Gods mixing with humans, or humans becoming gods, or being Gods. Christianity is just a variation of this theme. You are widely read on various religions, I'm not sure why you don't see the connection. Hmm maybe - I mean in a thread where I ask you, why do you believe God exists, and you post your story, one can forgive me for thinking that's your argument. Usually one should lead with their strongest most rational and demonstrable argument first. So do you have a rational argument for the existence of God since we've established that your personal experience is not a rational basis to accept god exists. I'm not sure why you find it more rational than Judaism. Judaism is the religion of Gods chosen people. It's perfectly rational. Under Christian theology, the only problem is that the Jews missed the change and coming of the messiah. Christianity is based on Judaism. But more to the point why do you find it more rational - simply because it's more internally coherent, or have you finally found some remarkable evidence of God that's thus far eluded the world?
  8. Remember that Masihi doesn't hold to oneness theology therefore Jesus impregnating his own mother is a strawman. I already went down that line. As far as I can tell Masihi holds that the father son and holy ghost are 3 separate entities. This raises the question of polytheism imo.
  9. This line is utterly hilarious given the context of your reasons for believing Christianity over in the thread where I asked you directly why you believed. Literally your answer is basically "I had a personal experience therefore I believe Christianity". How is that a rational argument? And we've been pointing out plenty of rational reasons why Christianity is nonsense, but you can't see them through your apologetic filter you have on. According to you, God, the father, had a son (You know like all the Greek and Roman gods did) by impregnating a virgin human by the holy ghost (WTF is the holy ghost?) so that the son could be sacrificed to provide salvation to humanity. And you say that is rational?? It reads like bad Greek mythology. (Probably because the early Christians 'borrowed' from the religions around them, melding it to Judaism, much like how Islam borrowed from Judaism and Christianity) We haven't even properly discussed the illogical position you hold that God who created everything somehow didn't create all the circumstances necessary for evil and sin.
  10. Ok so you've been around a few religions. But a God having a son who is sacrificed, and who has an arch enemy in Satan (Whom he incidentally created) is logical? I don't follow your reasoning here. You realize gods incarnating as humans is not a new concept, and certainly not restricted to Christianity? Christian wasn't even the first religion to come up with the idea. How did you know this? How do you distinguish this dream experience from the dreams of millions of others who also have experiences involving all other different gods? There is a story of a Christian surgeon on youtube who's daughter was dying from a 'non curable' heart condition. He felt drawn to pray to Allah to heal his daughter. The daughter miraculously got better and he now devotes his life to spreading the message of Islam. How does anyone distinguish between your story and his? Why do you not find his experience more compelling than yours? I believe you had a dream that you interpreted as being from the God you were currently looking into. However, this is an emotional argument. You seem very well read, I assume you will know why an emotional argument shouldn't convince anyone of the truth of anything. Being happy about something doesn't make it true. Many issues with politics these days is because people hold a position for emotional reasons not rational evidence based reasons. I dreamed I could fly. Should I jump off a building, or should I go with the available evidence which states I will fall and die? So I guess my main question based on your story is: should anyone accept a proposition because they had an experience?
  11. Hi @Masihi We've been having a great theological discussion, and you've told us that you left Islam and accepted Christianity based on theological reasons. What we haven't gotten into is why do you believe God exists in the first place? From what I can gather you were raised Muslim therefore you were just brought up believing God existed. Now that you are an adult though, what are your reasons for accepting the proposition that God exists is true? If you (Or anyone else) wants to have a discussion around our various reasons for accepting/not accepting the proposition please post away. This isn't a formal debate or anything. Please start off with the definition of the God you are proposing so we can avoid arguing strawnman positions.
  12. Thank you. We've let too many unfounded assertions go by during this theological discussion by not asking "evidence please".
  13. It's interesting that Islam views atheists as pagans. That view is fundamentally incorrect. Pagans do believe in God's, normally many of them. Atheists don't believe in any God's. An interesting state of affairs.
  14. At the very top right of each page when you scroll to the top is your name - click on it and select profile. You'll find the options in there. (Might have to poke around and play a bit to figure it all out)
  15. Hi @TinkerGrey Welcome to Ex-C. Feel free to share your story and join in the other topics. LF
  16. Totally, our observation was pointing out the curiosity of someone rejecting a particular religion in a very religious country, for another religion that from the outside is really not that much different. I'm curious, would it be worse openly saying you've gone from Muslim to Christian or Muslim to atheist where you live? I absolutely agree with this whole heartedly. I believe that people should be free to choose and believe whatever religion they like, or to not have any religion so long as their religion doesn't harm others. I'd go so far as to say that if your belief is that you should bash your head against a wall, knock yourself out - I support your right to do that. But don't force someone else to do it. I think you and I very much agree here. That of course won't stop me arguing against religion, and it won't stop religious people trying to convince me there is a god, and nor should it.
  17. And in a country where adoption of another religion leaves one open to discrimination at one end of the scale, and death at the other end.
  18. The problem with all these theological discussions is that they are primarily assertions without evidence. You have your interpretation and theology, I have mine (when I was a Christian), Joe Bloggs has his, the Pope has his, 1000 different Christian denominations have theirs. Who's right? God knows.
  19. But we really didn't have a conversation about objections did we? We had a theological discussion which we pointed out some issues but it was largely theological discussion. Had you asked why don't you believe Christianity the answers would be different. No evidence for God being the primary reason there. Anyway I see you wish to leave. All the best, stay safe, and should you wish for conversation again you know where to find us.
  20. I really don't think a pissing match about the worst religion or state to live under is going to help here. From my point of view all religion is bad, it poisons everything. (To quote Hitchen's) Yes the Islamic states are some of the worst religious oppressors currently, though China is not much better on a straight out oppressive score. However religion affects all of us negatively in different ways. Yes in Western counties we have it easier overall. Christianity is not held back, however, because of Christianity - it's held back by a secular state in all Western countries. We do not want to give Christianity back its full power or it could be like the forth beast in Daniel trampling all before it.
  21. Fair points, though I would rebut the claim that says your response shows I don't. You and I quite clearly have quite different theologies I I will show with my replies below. Some I answer using my own ex christian theology, some as my current position. Many of the theological issues we are discussing have been discussed for 2000 years and continue being discussed. Yes - you can readily point out the flaws of Islam, but not Christianity. You realize the usage of the word almah is but one line of refutation. The fact that he's talking directly to the king, and that a few chapters later discusses the now fulfilled prophesy puts a bit of a dent in it. Not to mention direct reference of him sitting on the throne of David, which Jesus never did. This requires some major theological apologetic to get around. With my Christian hat on I respectfully disagree. If you create multiple self existences you are essentially saying there are three Gods. This is polytheism and directly contradicts the first commandment - "You shall have no other gods before Me." The God of the OT is one God. You go ask any religious Jew. Yes, one God three different offices. So essentially he is, at least under the theology I'm familiar with. Essentially it breaks down to this: If you have a oneness theology then your god does sacrifice himself to himself because the father and the son are one. (Jesus literally said that) If, you are trinitarian, as you seem to hold, then there are three separate god entities and you are polytheist. Now the OT is full of warnings against polytheism so I'm not sure how one (Orthodox and Catholics?) holds such a position without essentially throwing away 1500 years of Jewish theology that that the NT is based on. I don't think you are looking at the logical impossibility of what you are proposing. For man to sin he had to be created with the ability to sin which ipso facto rules him out being perfect. That's why a sinless sacrifice (Jesus) was needed. I'm not sure how you get past the issue that under Christian theology there was nothing, then God created everything, thus in order for anything such as sin or evil etc to exist it must have been created by the creator. Unless, of course god is not omniscient, omnipotent and all loving. He could for example be a bumbling fool and create the ability to sin unknowingly and then go oppsie we'd better fix that... by sacrificing my son 13.8 billion years after I create the universe. This is incorrect. Adams sin is imputed to us. Not just the consequences thereof. The consequences of Adams sin is a fallen world, hence why they are driven out of Eden. But everyone is born a sinner because Adams sin is imputed to us before we even take our first breath. Whew. Christian hat off. I feel like the theological arguments back in the old days.
  22. My first recollection of the term was used by my pastor in various usages. E.g "God transcends time and space (Thus making God immaterial)", "God transcends human understanding and reasoning" (Which to me is a fancy way of saying we can't understand God. Note this was often explained prior to preaching about how to understand God's will with no irony) I've also come across it in debates used by both theists to explain the nature of God, and by atheists to argue why we have no reason to accept said nature. I've never heard anyone refer to any particular personage. I take it you refer to the father, son and holy ghost? I can only say that my church was not trinitarian. They do not believe the doctrine of 3 separate persons or God's, but that God is one, but reveals himself in 3 offices. Much like a human, say Joe Blogg, might be a father, a son, and a husband, but he's not three people, he's just Joe. You can see some of my issues with this theology. God is both transcendent, beyond our understanding, and yet still able to interact with the physical world and contact me. Just science cannot show this because... limitations. And yet some of the claims are definitely within the remit of science to test. Now either God doesn't want to be found during said testing, or he's messing with us intentionally. Either way it appears to us as no god existing. Unless you've had the holy ghost reveal himself of course. Slightly off track of the topic, but hopefully that explains the transcendent bit.
  23. Not sure... maybe it was my "different face same baloney" comment?
  24. Oh no, God is transcendent. Science cannot detect God, You need a revelation by the holy spirit brother. If you pray, God will answer you. (I have actually been told this... that's not me joking... even though the whole 'pray and you'll know God' concept is a joke.)
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.