Hit And Run Xtians

[Looking4Answers]

So far, I am not sensing that anyone has a good argument that has been put forth.

 

Bullshit. Many here (myself included) have successfully argued against many of the inane arguments you put forth. However, what you have done, thus far, is ignore the ones that apparently you cannot come up with a counter argument for.

[agnosticator]

Heaven/hell are the only options and if we disagree with the bible, we are assigned to hell. No choice on our part. You only fool yourself to buy into it.

 

Biblical Christianity displays it's version of god, and claims its god is the true god. We have no way of knowing anything about god. God is a mystery, if god exists. So, the bible is false and has not proven anything objectively verifiable about god. Don't play games and pretend you haven't read any of my past posts on the subject.

 

Yes, heaven and hell are the only options; however, a person doesn't go to hell for disagreeing with the Bible, a person goes to hell for willful and unjust rebellion against God.

 

You say that we have no way of knowing anything about God which is a self-refuting knowledge statement about God. You say that God is a mystery, again a knowledge statement about God. How could you possibly know any of this about God if what you say is true? So, it is actually your statements that are logically fallacious, and not the Bible that is false.

 

Without the bible, there is no "willful and unjust rebellion". Without the bible there is no christian god. Without the bible, there is no sin, nor salvation; heaven or hell.

 

So, I'll be more specific and say, "I believe god is a mystery, if god exists". That is really what I think.

Your knowledge statement runs into the same problem in that you claim to know god. But your "knowledge" is really belief.

[Abiyoyo]

Oh, really? So what is the condition for a man to go to Heaven then?

 

Trusting in Jesus. Belief in God existence is not enough. "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!" (James 2:19)

 

Do you think all the Islamic will go to Hell? Jews (which I remind you are still God's people)?

 

Lets say an Islamic came to you, and talked with you about Mohammad. The Islamic person says that if you don't believe in Mohammad as the same as God, then you will perish for eternity. What would you say? Remember, their are just as many Islamic as Christians. You, just happen to live in America where Christianity is more predominant; where as if you lived in an Islamic country, and a preacher came to you saying this and that about worshiping Jesus. Guess what. That person just became a blasphemous person, because Islam believes in One God, no other forms or trinity, etc.

[Justin]

It says both, as YoYo pointed out. It also calls a bat a bird. This all goes back to what i was saying in the other threads, the Bible is a product of its times and is filled with things that people believed back then, whales were fish and bats were birds, flat earth and solid sky dome, monsters, etc.

 

LNC how do you account for Esau is you believe that god gives people free will?

 

Wrong, you are getting your information from inaccurate sources. It says that a bat is a winged creature in the original language. Do some additional research (outside of atheist sites) and you will confirm this. There is no reference to the earth being flat - again false information, nor a solid sky dome. Regarding monsters, this just shows that there were large sea creatures and from science we know this to be the case. What about Esau would indicate that he didn't have free will?

 

Actually LNC, i didn't get that from any atheist sites. I got it from common reading of the Bible. Now i will have to look into what the original texts said to see if it in fact says winged creature. I have my doubts though. It will probably just be like your assertion that virgin is prophesized in the OT. Yet there is no proof that i could find and you never did give any proof. However, i did post a link that makes it clear that Isiah was talking about the near future, not the distant future.

 

I gave you many links to check out in reference to the flat earth and solid sky dome that you said screw all about, other than make a jab at the author of one of those sites, or to simply no, i'm right and they are wrong. Did you know the book of Enoch has descriptions of the solid firmament and even tells of a journey to the end of the earth and seeing the windows in it that the sun and the moon pass through? Before you say that this book is not in the Bible keep in mind that it is quoted quiet a bit in the NT and early influential church people, like Justin Martyr, held it in high regard? Monsters, what in the sea has armor and breaths fire? I guess this was just in biblical days huh? Did you know that Behemoth and Leviathan were mythological monsters in ancient Jewish mythology?

 

Isn't it obvious what i am meaning by Esau? How in blazes did he have free will when God hated him before he was even born. He didn't even have a bloody chance.

[Justin]

First, why don't you go and bring some of those arguements from that closed thread into a new thread. Second, you quoted almost word for word on some of those sites and did not quote it or list the reference. All you had to do was put quotation marks on them or show a link. This is how someone gets to be called a 'cut and paster'.

 

Because, there is one of me and many of you, so I have a hard enough time keeping up with this thread. Second, if you have evidence that I quoted almost word for word please provide that. Shantou brought two examples, one of which I admitted using as a source, the other I had never seen before. However, he gave no evidence that I had pulled anything from the second source, nor could he since I had never seen it before, so it was a false claim. Again, nothing that either one of us is using for our information is original. You and YoYo got your bat/bird argument from an atheist apologetics website. How do I know? I have heard that argument before from atheists and know that you all use TalkOrigins and other sites as your references. If you don't believe me, check out the link to TalkOrigins that I embedded. Sure, we all research our favorite sites for information and when I need specific info like with the Gilgamesh reference (that argument also can also be seen here http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/feedback/may01.html) I do research, just like all of you. However, this only happens in these specific cases. But the point is that you were refuted and then dropped the claims, just like you will with the bat/bird argument.

 

What have i been refuted on and dropped? It is you who has dropped all the arguements on the flat earth and firmament and geocentric earth simply because that thread was shut down.

 

Again i say, that i did not get my bat arguement from talkorigins or any other atheist site. I have no idea where YoYo got his info, even though i can guess with pretty good accuracy that he got it from the same place i got mine, a simple reading of the Bible. You seem to have no idea that YoYo is a fellow christian. But it is obvious that he subscribes to a different brand of it than you. There are hundreds upon hundreds you know. Btw, Talkorigins is not an atheist site, it is a science site.

 

As for Shanton's second source, it wasn't word for word but it left little to the imagination that you had copied from it.

[Justin]

I am saying that there is sufficient evidence

 

Will you stop saying that and actually, for once, give some evidence. Someone said on here a few pages back that you just assert things as fact with nothing to back it up. This is the truth. If there were evidence all around us as you say then the people who study what is all around us, scientists, would be christian instead of well over 90% having no belief in a god. If there was evidence all around us then creation scientists and ID morons would submit their "findings" to peer reviewed scientific journals and institutes instead of just putting it on their creation websites and books.

[Justin]

As for William Lane Craig, he specializes in the origin of the universe (arguing the Kalam Cosmological Argument),

 

What about this argument hasn't been refuted? Dawkins covers it in the God Delusion and many atheist sites deal with it too. Actually, i have seen this argument, or rather it's focal points, going under several names. Furthermore, it does nothing to establish the christain god if it actually worked. It would only mean that a god was responsible. All the religions of the world would then instantly jump in to say their god was responsible. really weak argument.

 

They don't argue for it, but just assume that since there is not enough evidence (by their standards) to prove God exists, then somehow atheism is the fall back position. That is logically fallacious as the fall back position would be agnosticism. Yet, instead atheists will redefine the term atheism to be equivalent to agnosticism - just so they can call themselves atheists rather than agnostics. I find that highly interesting and telling.

 

As Neon said, i find you highly arrogant and holier-than-thou to assume that you know the reasons why one has left the faith and taken up atheisim. This is right up there with your claim that the pain that a deconvert goes through is because they know they are leaving the truth. Yet another weak argument. You're on a roll tonight.

[Ouroboros]

Trusting in Jesus. Belief in God existence is not enough. "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!" (James 2:19)

Ah, so it's trusting now, not belief, or doing good acts, or love God, or whatever is the flavor of the month.

 

People have rebelled against God.

Rebellion is a conscious act against a know opponent. Since I don't believe your God exists, I can't, by definition or any practical terms rebel against him. So it's completely moot.

 

God is not a puppet to be ordered around. He has given sufficient evidence and if you choose to ignore that evidence, God is not obligated to answer all challenges put out to him. One atheist I heard today said that he would believe if he saw a few resurrections. One would not be enough for him. He was asked how many and he couldn't answer. I would guess that it would always be one more than he had seen.

You are judging again. You don't know this, but you are assuming this. It's not true, because I know it. You don't know it to be true in my life, so you are assuming, and by stating these invalid ideas as facts against me, you are judging me.

 

I am saying that there is sufficient evidence and if you choose to ignore or deny that evidence, then it is not God's fault. I never said anything about evil, but we are all sinners. Yes, the Bible says that it is because of our sinful nature that we suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:8).

It was the lack of evidence that made me lose my faith. Not ignoring them, not denying them, or rebelling against them. You are wrong.

 

But you are judging him without knowing him as well. So why is your judgment OK, but his somehow biased? I haven't judged you, it is not my job to do so. In fact, Paul is not even judging you, he is simply writing what God had revealed to him. So, I am assuming by your definition that you fall into the camp of being prejudiced as well since you are doing that for which you judge Paul, is that right? If you believe the judgment about you (by God, not by Paul or me) is wrong, on what basis?

Yes, you are judgmental, because you assume and declare false facts about people. That is judging them.

 

No, I have said it before and I will say it again, I am a sinner saved by grace. I didn't earn it and certainly don't deserve it. I have no more direct line to God than anyone else who reads the Bible. I am not a supernatural source of knowledge since I am but a mere mortal. So, you lose that bet. But it is curious that you seem to acknowledge some knowledge about me that is not based upon any evidence, might I ask if you have some supernatural knowledge? ESP perhaps? Maybe Tarot cards? I just wonder from where you claim such insight about me.

So how the hell do you know anything about me? Supernatural knowledge, ESP perhaps? Or maybe you are using tarot cards? You use general statements from the Bible against me, without knowing me. So you are judging me.

 

Why would someone worship that in which they don't believe. Worship assumes knowledge of that which is worshiped. All I am saying is that mere acknowledgment of existence is not sufficient. God doesn't need worshipers, but he deserves to be worshiped. It is not vanity, it is reality. Worship is the logical response of coming into relationship with the creator and sustainer of the universe and each one of our lives. I don't worship out of duty, but out of awe and reverence.

Whatever.

 

That is just what I said. Interestingly enough, I also a very curious and, yes, even a skeptical person, which is why I could never be an atheist. There are too many holes that could never be filled in by such a worldview. Now, I know atheists hate it when it is called a worldview, but that is what it is. For me, the reason, science and evidence all lead me to belief in God. God is all over nature, yes the God of the Bible (he is not mine, I don't own him; rather, I am his). If nature is god, it is a cruel god indeed! Nature is red in tooth and claw as Alfred, Lord Tennyson wrote in response to his understanding of evolution. Yes, nature is a cruel god if it is a god at all. It is a god that I could never worship.

You're contradicting yourself. You say that you could never be an atheist, which implicitly indicate you never were an atheist, and yet you claim you were lead to belief in God. So what is it? You were an atheist and were led to God, or you were never an atheist to being with but just built up a fantasy construct in your head to give you the excuses you needed to continue?

 

And btw, if your God created the nature, and nature is cruel, then your God created it cruel. Yes? Doesn't the Bible claim nature proves that God exists? So if nature is cruel, then it proves God to be cruel, or nature shouldn't be a proof of God's existence. There's a lot of mismatch in your statements.

[hereticzero]

As we speak, there is such a fundy in the Lion's Den. I think it is a feeler thread.

[Looking4Answers]

Justin,

 

Now i will have to look into what the original texts said to see if it in fact says winged creature.

 

I covered this earlier (so here it is so you won't have to look it up):

 

“And these [are they which] ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they [are] an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, And the vulture, and the kite after his kind; Every raven after his kind; And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.” (Le 11:13-19 AV)

 

The word "fowl" there is the Hebrew word for "winged creature." And while LNC may be referring to this set of verses, there is another set he needs to consider:

 

“[Of] all clean birds ye shall eat. But these [are they] of which ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, And the glede, and the kite, and the vulture after his kind, And every raven after his kind, And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, The little owl, and the great owl, and the swan, And the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the cormorant, And the stork, and the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.” (De 14:11-18 AV)

 

The Hebrew word for "bird" used in this section is the word "tzippor" and it is the common word for "bird." Notice also that "bat" is included in this list of "birds." From both the lists of creatures included (eagles, pelicans, hawks, owls, etc) and the Hebrew words used, it is easy to see that the ancient Hebrews considered a bat to be a bird.

 

I covered this more fully on page 5 of this thread. LNC has been doing a good job of completely ignoring each of his statements that I have overturned and proven wrong.

[Ouroboros]

I covered this more fully on page 5 of this thread. LNC has been doing a good job of completely ignoring each of his statements that I have overturned and proven wrong.

That's his forte.

[Looking4Answers]

That's his forte.

 

I've noticed! And I am not trying to toot my own horn (not too much), but I put a bit of work into dealing with the issues. I even bothered to look up the verses, even pulling open my Hebrew Bible (the one I used to use when I was a missionary in Israel) and all of that. But he just ignored whatever I had to say to go on and attack someone else.

 

The coward.

[Neon Genesis]

Ironically, he's exactly the type of xtian I've mentioned in my opening post in this thread, but he likely didn't even bother to read it.

[Skeptic]

Notice also that "bat" is included in this list of "birds." From both the lists of creatures included (eagles, pelicans, hawks, owls, etc) and the Hebrew words used, it is easy to see that the ancient Hebrews considered a bat to be a bird.

 

That's hilarious! I kind of understand why they would think that before science, but in the 21st century, there is absolutely no excuse. It made me think of the Calvin and Hobbes comic where Calvin has to do a report on bats and he calls them bugs. Holey babble fails.

[chefranden]

The choice narrowed down to its essentials is "turn or burn." What if I don't want to either? What if I choose to go bowling instead? It seems like a person with free will could think of many alternative choices.

 

I do choose to go bowling as opposed to either turn or burn. I Choose bowling because I cant believe the other 2 choicies exist. There is nothing to turn to and no where to burn. LNC said above that God knows the real reason I don't believe. Well you'd think that God would want to make me aware of the errors in my thinking. So that I could think properly. But so far nothing. At leas Thor clucks a lighting bolt at me once in awhile.

[Ouroboros]

You're absolutely right Chef. And not to forget that God could be Allah, and since LNC is an infidel he will go to Hell with us for not properly following the commands from Allah. I'm certain LNC is not praying five times a day facing Mecca.

[Neon Genesis]

You're absolutely right Chef. And not to forget that God could be Allah, and since LNC is an infidel he will go to Hell with us for not properly following the commands from Allah. I'm certain LNC is not praying five times a day facing Mecca.

I read that moderate Muslims believe both Jews and Christians will be saved because they believe in the same god and are counted as "People Of The Book", but Christians who believe in the trinity will go to hell because they believe the trinity is polytheism, and polytheism is a sin in Islam. Unfortunately, that means 90% of all mainstream modern xtians will go to hell anyway, and if LNC believes in the trinity, he'll go to Muslim hell when he dies. What annoys me though is that LNC will use the "it's a mistranslation" argument when it comes to bats being birds, but he doesn't apply it to hell since in the OT, the Hebrew word for hell is Sheol, which means the grave, and hell is a purely Christian invention that they stole from Greek mythology. You have to wonder though, if the bible is the divinely inspired word of God, why didn't God inspire the translators, too? Was God too busy on vacation with Baal or something?

[Ouroboros]

You have to wonder though, if the bible is the divinely inspired word of God, why didn't God inspire the translators, too? Was God too busy on vacation with Baal or something?

Or even, why didn't God get the religion right the first time, and the Book? Why do we need 1,000,000 different theologians, scholars, text critics, translators producing yet another 1,000,000 books, translations, explanations, letters, arguments, just for the reason to somehow get the right image of God? Why can't God just speak out and convince everyone of the same image?

 

Interesting that moderate Muslims believe that. But you're right, it means pretty much most Christians will go to Muslim Hell for being polytheists.

[Neon Genesis]

They're not moderate Muslims in the sense of being liberal Muslims as I'm not sure what ultra-liberal Muslims believe. But it's the Muslims who are "moderate" by Islamic standards but aren't much different than your typical fundie xtian, if that makes sense. It was something I read about in the book No God But God by the Muslim scholar Reza Aslan.

[LNC]

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that buddy.

 

Do you have evidence that would prove otherwise?

 

Nature is God. I don't hate nature. And I don't hate your God, because he doesn't exist. So no, I don't hate God in any sense or fashion. But you hate people who doesn't follow your particular brand of religion. You're exclusive and hateful to other people, because they don't believe YOU.

 

What makes you think that I hate people who don't believe what I believe? Again, you make accusations for which you have no evidence. I don't believe I have shown any hate toward you or anyone else on this site. I have not called names, although I have been called names here. I have not said anything mean, although mean things have been said to me. So, actually you have made a baseless assertion. I can't control whether people believe me and it really isn't ultimately my concern. Believing me won't do anything for you, believing Jesus is the only thing that will make a difference.

 

Sounds like the ramblings of a lunatic.

 

Again with the names, and you say that I hate you?

 

So you're sick then too? You rebelled too? In what sense? What did you do? You tried to kill God? What did you do to deserve God's wrath?

 

Your God is based on an old book. My God, the Nature, is based on reality and the book of real life, right here, right now. You're the one who hates the real God, and because of it, you're creating your own hell, here on Earth and drag other people with you. Misery loves company.

 

Absolutely, I am a sinner who deserves hell, just like everyone else on this earth. I rebel every day. I have broken all the 10 commandments at one time or other. I am as guilty of the death of Jesus as is everyone else on earth, we are all complicit. My rebellion merits God's wrath every day; however, I have put my trust in Jesus who promised that his death has covered my sin, and the sins of all who will trust in him.

 

Why does the age of the book make a difference? Was truth different 2K years ago than it is today? Well, in the age of post-modernism in which we live, maybe truth was held in higher regard back then.

 

If nature is God, it is much more vicious then your view of the God of the Bible. Nature is responsible for billions of deaths throughout the history of the universe. And, talk about genocide, nature is responsible for mass and multiple instances of genocide. Look at recent history, we have the tsunami in Asia, Katrina, earthquakes, mudslides in Central America, volcanoes, and more. And those are just a few recent instances of natures fury unleashed against life on earth.

 

The other problem is that you have no way of determining whether nature is a god, only speculation. What evidence do you have for this belief? Have you communicated with your god? Does your god give you direction for your life? How about morality, has your god communicated any moral standards that can be tested? No, I will stick with the God who has revealed himself personally to man and who is loving, powerful, and personally involved with his creation.

[Abiyoyo]

Absolutely, I am a sinner who deserves hell, just like everyone else on this earth. I rebel every day. I have broken all the 10 commandments at one time or other. I am as guilty of the death of Jesus as is everyone else on earth, we are all complicit. My rebellion merits God's wrath every day; however, I have put my trust in Jesus who promised that his death has covered my sin, and the sins of all who will trust in him.

 

If His death covered our sins, then why did he tell the woman that almost got stoned, ..go and sin no more. For that matter, if Jesus covered sin, and we will be with Him regardless, then why even have church?

[LNC]

And yet you do, and yet you do. You judge me by saying that I reject God. You're claiming to know (somehow magically) that I somehow know there is a God, but I reject that God. And that is, excuse my rude french, is BULL-SHIT!

 

I don't know if your God exists or not. So far, what I have seen, heard, read, studied, etc, only shows that your particular God does NOT exist. Everything points away from your God, not towards.

 

So my reason to rejecting your God has nothing to do with me believing he exists and me rebelling, but rather: I don't believe he exists!!! I think it's all baloney. I think it's children's tales. I think it's fairy tales. I believe you have been had by a 2,000 prank! I think you are deluding yourself and dragging other people down with you! I think it's all just the same as Harry Potter.

 

So DO NOT judge me by saying that I do know but reject God knowingly or in rebellion. Because that IS JUDGING!

 

Really, when did I judge you personally? I believe that it is you who has called me a lunatic and other names. I have not called you any names or personally judged you. When did I say that you reject God. I speak in general terms, so if you have applied these statements to your life personally, that is your doing, not mine.

 

I haven't seen any evidence that you have provided that would point away from God. I also believe that the existence of the universe, the fine-tuning, and objective morality alone are enough evidence to point to God's existence. I keep hearing people on this site claiming that morality, for example, is objective, yet I haven't heard one person give me a valid reason (apart from God) why. So, I believe that the preponderance of the evidence actually points us to God.

 

OK, in your first paragraph you accuse me of judging you by saying that you reject God and now you make the claim yourself. If you don't believe that he exists, and if he does and has said that he has given enough evidence for us to know that, then you have rejected him. You say that God is a fairy tale, yet you believe that nature is god, I don't see how you can say that this isn't a fairy tale since the nature-god has been the basis of many fairy tales. That doesn't make sense. Harry Potter is a good example of this, thanks for bringing it up. Harry Potter is based upon a pantheistic or panentheistic view of reality, but then you say that this is what you believe.

 

I don't have to judge you for rejecting God, you have done that yourself. I don't know your heart or mind, except what you reveal about yourself. It is also not my job to judge you, that is God's job. But again, it sounds like you have judged yourself.

 

I believe you really believe what you believe. I don't question if you honestly believe or not, but recently, you have questioned my honesty in my belief. By making false assertions about me, you are in FACT judging.

 

If you can show me evidence that I have done this, I will apologize. But, I don't remember judging you personally. So, please show me where I did this.

[Looking4Answers]

Hey, Butthead! Yeah, you, LNC!

 

How about responding to all the other questions and responses leveled at YOU before demanding an answer from HanSolo or anyone else? You have said many things that were incorrect on many levels. You have said the Bible says or does not say certain things. People here have gone to lengths to correct you on these things. However, you ignore them, refuse to respond to them and you do not apologize for your errors. Now you demand that HanSolo respond to you? Well .... shit ... now we know who god really is ... its you. What a pile a smelly dung you are.

[Abiyoyo]

People here have gone to lengths to correct you on these things. However, you ignore them, refuse to respond to them and you do not apologize for your errors. Now you demand that HanSolo respond to you? Well .... shit ... now we know who god really is ... its you. What a pile a smelly dung you are.

 

I was thinking the same thing......you took the words right out of my mouth L4A

 

It would be nice if LNC would actually answer a question.

[Looking4Answers]

I was thinking the same thing......you took the words right out of my mouth L4A

 

I normally don't resort to such things (calling people names and the like), but I am just sick of LNC and how he treats people here.

 

In any case, I am glad to see I am not the only one feeling this way about him .