To All Of God's Critics

[boftx]

BAA,

 

Agreed. My attempt at dialog has resulted in Thumbelina withdrawing to a circular argument. It is more than evident that although she questioned my credentials before giving even a partial answer to a question it is clear she has not read the major Christian writers of the 20th century, chief among whom would be Paul Tillich.

 

This thread has already presented a wealth of serious debate for those who desire such and no one, either Christian or Ex-Christian, is likely to benefit from reading more from her. No sincere Christian would want to worship such a puny god as she does.

 

I think that most you would agree that Thumbelina has shown herself to be little more than a modern day Pharisee, at best. Learned in words, and totally lacking in Spirit, a whited sepulcher.

[TheBeast]

Yes Beast!

 

Thumbelina is an ultra-hard core Biblical literalist. 

A 6-day, Young Earth Creationist. 

 

BAA.

Ohhh, my favourite. I like to toy with bible literalists

[TheBeast]

Bible literalist bait...."but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." Numbers 31:18

[TheBeast]

 

 

There is no care or love in her posts... they actually make me physically ill - I am repelled, and nauseous.

 

It's pure unadulterated hate, narcissism and elitism covered with 'courtesy' and sickly-sweet syrup. It's like (?) talking to a mentally ill person.. the 'words' are 'right' but the subtext is all wrong.. and the misunderstanding of what people say when they reply or query... nope, BAA is dead right - she is dangerous. Cognitive distortions, gaslighting, projection and splitting all over the place, couched in religious twaddle. (IMHO) Here is someone who does not have any comprehension of empathy or real love - which fully explains her identification with her monstrous deity and her inability to see the cruelty and sadism of her (very subjective) belief system. A wolf in sheep's clothing. I feel sorry for anyone in her sphere.

 

Reminds me of Scott M. Pecks book, "The People of the Lie".

 

I've never had that kind of and as strong a reaction to a poster before... interesting. (I HAVE had it when faced with a malignant narcissist though)

 

I fully support keeping her here in the Den - our newer members are far too vulnerable.

 

I agree totally. I find that nasty woman (and the high horse she rode in on) totally repulsive. I won't waste my time trying to talk with such an arrogant thing, but I do check in once in a while because I enjoy seeing her be put in her place.

 

 

 

I realized that you don't talk to me, you tend to talk about or at me and I took that as a sign that you don't want me talking to you but I don't mean you any harm. Actually, when I see your little devil/angel kitty avatar I smile a little. Not everyone can stand the method in which I communicate, I get that but some people CAN stand it and those are the ones I tend to bother.

 

I do believe in a moral absolute and my posts tend to reflect that belief but I actually do believe that I am a friend and the "wounds" I inflict (Prov 27:6) are essentially for the eventual good of the lions. Besides, some lions have teeth and claws that are sharp lol and I have to get my Linus blanket and tell them "back! back! back!"

I can stand your methods, but can you stand mine? Words like 'moral absolutes' give me the smell of blood.

[boftx]

There is even better bait than that:  Consider the following:

 

“Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.” 2Chronicles 4:2

[par4dcourse]

On the topic of the Lions Den:

She's got 33k views. Somebody is reading this crap. The Den provides an outlet for anger at christian stupidity, provided there's a willing christian to participate. I say let it ride. It'll die when everyone gets bored with her antics.

[Ravenstar]

I'm still trying to figure out how there was light before the stars (and sun!) were created.  LOL

 

The moon is not a light

 

what the hell is a 'firmament?' and where is it?

 

And how did El become Yahweh? And why did Yahweh steal his dad's (and brother's) consort? Why were there icons in the temple before the release from Babylon?

 

How exactly does the Tower of Babel work?  Shouldn't there be some reaction from god for.. say.. astronauts?

 

So many questions.... 

[TheBeast]

There is even better bait than that:  Consider the following:

 

“Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.” 2Chronicles 4:2

There are so many contradicitons in the bible that only a Christian is too blind to see them. Still, I think it's easier for them to ignore mathematical problems than moral "absolutes". I like to see them squirm while they come to terms with their own intellectual dishonesty.

[Astreja]

 

Howdy, Astreja. Yes, I do remember your stance on that issue and it is your choice to believe what you want. All I can do is tease you occasionally as a way of saying "What's up?" but I don't and can't force you to believe.

 

No, Thumbelina, it is not a choice.  I tried reading the Bible, with the literal mind of a child, starting at age six.  Your imaginary friend apparently never wanted Me to believe in it, because I never did.  That was 49 years ago, and I still don't believe.

 

And the more I learn about Christianity, the more intensely anti-theistic I become.  In fact, I think that frightening a child -- Any child! -- with tales of hell is egregious child abuse, and should be punishable by prison time. 

 

As for the teasing, it is not funny and not appreciated.

[Ravenstar]

They should all have to spend time in a country where little children have to steal, lie or sell their bodies just to eat... and then talk to me about moral absolutes.

 

gah!

[centauri]

 

Centauri,

 

You and I both know that Thumbelina will never listen to you, never pay any attention to your entirely valid points and never respond to the OT quotations you cite.  All she will ever do is to claim that you are not reading the Bible properly - but she is.

 

This thread has therefore ceased to be any kind of dialog between you both and is now simply a clash of wills between the pair of you.  She will not back down and you, out of concern for the lurkers, therefore feel obliged to present the correct interpretation of scripture, for their benefit.  So the same ground gets ploughed, over and over and over again.

 

Would you agree with me that this thread has become a mockery of true and meaningful dialog?

I fully agree that meaningful dialog died long ago.

This particular topic on salvation through the law has been beaten to death over the years here.

But this isn't merely a coincidence, it's a standard Christian method.

They seek to beat people into submission with unending repetition.

Ignoring the sermonizing and false statements creates the impression to lurkers that ex-Xians and skeptics cannot respond to what the Christian claims.

That's the real dilemma.

There are visitors that may be starting their journey out of Christianity and that's why Christian falsehoods need to be dealt with, even if it means grinding through the same field over and over again.

I have no easy solution to the dilemma because this is the Lion's Den and a certain amount of sermonizing is permitted.

However, the more time she spends having to respond here, the less time she has to be in other forums and sites, seeking to perform the Christian form of mind control on vulnerable people.

That's the only good thing I see coming from it.

[Astreja]

Any other Lions reading this?

Has this farce gone on for far too long? 

Please tell me what you think.

 

I think we're done with Thumbelina, BAA.  There's no entertainment value in her writing, just a lot of smarmy condescension as she tries to play Scolding Mommy to the poor, benighted killer felines whose lair she invaded.

 

I wouldn't be even slightly upset to see her gone.

[midniterider]

 

 

Sin is normal human behavior, and there is no one that is capable of not sinning.

 

 You are quite right and can you please tell that to Centauri! He thinks people in the OT were saved by keeping the law/works. That's why Jesus had to come, us regular humans could not remain sinless.That's why the Jews failed to evangelize other nations, they did not depend on God, they tried to do it in their own strength.

This gets really, really tiresome.

It's no wonder I hate to converse or interact with Christians.

I don't ever expect you to get this but for the sake of lurkers and to correct your denial of scripture we'll go through this yet again.

People in the Old Testament are saved by keeping the law and having a contrite heart, repenting when they do wrong.

Stop denying what the scripture clearly states.

 

Ezek 18:20-22,27

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

 

Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.

 

Psa 119:155

Salvation is far from the wicked: for they seek not thy statutes.

 

There is no Jesus in any of this. Period.

Seek the law, not a pagan human sacrifice, for salvation.

 

How many bleeping times do we have to repeat this exercise????

Can you bleeping read???

 

Of course you can but you don't like what these passages say because it eliminates the need for Jesus and wrecks the foundation for Christianity.

 

People can save themselves through proper action.

That action includes keeping the law, which accomodates sin by providing atonement for it through sacrifice and prayer.

There is no magical god-man called Jesus needed in any of this.

You don't have to be sinless to be saved, just righteous.

You atone for sins as provided in the law, by repenting and doing good.

That (as the scripture clearly states) saves your soul alive.

Christianity is revisionist theology that changes the rules and contradicts God's prior instructions, which are very clear.

 

 

Centauri,

 

You and I both know that Thumbelina will never listen to you, never pay any attention to your entirely valid points and never respond to the OT quotations you cite.  All she will ever do is to claim that you are not reading the Bible properly - but she is.

 

This thread has therefore ceased to be any kind of dialog between you both and is now simply a clash of wills between the pair of you.  She will not back down and you, out of concern for the lurkers, therefore feel obliged to present the correct interpretation of scripture, for their benefit.  So the same ground gets ploughed, over and over and over again.

 

Would you agree with me that this thread has become a mockery of true and meaningful dialog?

That it's ceased to be anything but a soapbox for Thumbelina to deliver her sermons from?

(After all, she was labelled as a Soapbox christian for a time, but has refused to learn from that sanction.)

 

And what of any other members? 

Any other Lions reading this? 

Has this farce gone on for far too long? 

Please tell me what you think.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

The longer Thumb hangs out with Ex-Christians the more she will become like one. Just let her BS run its course. :-) The more she is pounded with the inconsistencies of the bible and logic and reason and critical thinking the more she will begin to doubt. So keep up the good work everyone. Her armor is cracking.

[TheUnknown]

 

 

 

Centauri,

 

You and I both know that Thumbelina will never listen to you, never pay any attention to your entirely valid points and never respond to the OT quotations you cite.  All she will ever do is to claim that you are not reading the Bible properly - but she is.

 

This thread has therefore ceased to be any kind of dialog between you both and is now simply a clash of wills between the pair of you.  She will not back down and you, out of concern for the lurkers, therefore feel obliged to present the correct interpretation of scripture, for their benefit.  So the same ground gets ploughed, over and over and over again.

 

Would you agree with me that this thread has become a mockery of true and meaningful dialog?

That it's ceased to be anything but a soapbox for Thumbelina to deliver her sermons from?

(After all, she was labelled as a Soapbox christian for a time, but has refused to learn from that sanction.)

 

And what of any other members? 

Any other Lions reading this? 

Has this farce gone on for far too long? 

Please tell me what you think.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

I'm not so sure about that. Whilst I entirely agree that it's a one sided dialogue with her missing or ignoring the point entirely, I agree with what par4dcourse posted in this thread.

 

The thing is I WAS paying attention when I first came on here under another username as a Christian and I ended up the same as the rest of you - a non-Christian. I have a strong suspicion that there are others as well that ended up the same as me. I've also noticed that she conveniently ignores any valid points and issues raised by both yourself, Centauri, Ravenstar and many others in the thread. The harsh reality is that you can all repeat yourselves over and over again until you're blue in the face, and it's like water off a ducks back.

 

It is, however, extremely helpful to those people that are questioning their faith to see the avoidance tactics she and the others that come on here engage in. As time goes by hers, and their arguments will continue to make even less sense.

[Thackerie]

 

Any other Lions reading this?

Has this farce gone on for far too long? 

Please tell me what you think.

 

I think we're done with Thumbelina, BAA.  There's no entertainment value in her writing, just a lot of smarmy condescension as she tries to play Scolding Mommy to the poor, benighted killer felines whose lair she invaded.

 

I wouldn't be even slightly upset to see her gone.

 

I agree. As much as I enjoy seeing her arrogant self being put down by some of the amazing people here, she wore out her entertainment value years ago. We don't need this condescending shrew; ban her and let her go annoy someone else.

[buffettphan]

And what of any other members? 

Any other Lions reading this? 

Has this farce gone on for far too long? 

Please tell me what you think.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

I have mixed feelings. While I sometimes find Thumby somewhat amusing and entertaining, I no longer interact with her because she would never answer any of my comments to her years ago.  Since she has no viable answer to anything, her posts just continue to highlight her own arrogant ignorance.    That's what amuses and entertains me.   If Thumby never posted here again, it would be fine with me.

 

However, as has been noted by other members here, the replies to her ramblings are beneficial to lurking christians.   Also, do we want her banned, then going off whining about it on some other robots-for-jeezus forum?   The "Oh poor me/martyr complex" is a MAJOR nerve-irk of mine.

 

We're on page 54 as I write this. Perhaps we could informally decide among ourselves how many more pages to let this debacle continue. When we reach that page number, we could just unofficially boycott her. If she replies to or quotes someone, instead of feeling obligated to respond, that person could simply reply back "BOYCOTT" (unless of course someone still is really intent on trying to get through her thick skull -- then hey, knock yourself out    ).   

 

I know it's a long shot, but that might send her the message that although she is not being banned, we are finished with her nonsense. If we stop feeding her, don't you think she'll eventually get tired of typing up so much text vomit?  

 

Anyhow, it's just an idea, and like I said, I know it's a long shot that anything whatsoever will penetrate her stubborn arrogance.  

 

 

 

 

[boftx]

I think that Thumbelina has received more than enough exposure on this thread at this point. Several of us have given reasonable, reasoned responses to her. So much so that she has now fully retreated into simply repeating pure dogma without any offer of theological backing.

 

Obviously she will never be swayed by us, but I think more than enough argument has been presented to have some impact on those who are open to honest debate.

 

I think all reasonable people know that it is impossible to either prove or disprove the existence of God. But it is reasonable to examine various concepts of "God" to see if they are consistent with the observable Universe as we know it.

[RipVanWinkle]

Those pathetic, homeless children should make any christian (and everyone else)stop and think for once.

But it doesn't. And the fact that it doesn't is proof enough for me that it is a phony religion. Helping the poor was emphasized repeatedly by Jesus. bill

[TrueFreedom]

Do we want more Christians to participate?  If so, how can we encourage that?

[boftx]

Do we want more Christians to participate?  If so, how can we encourage that?

 

I would say yes, especially if they have questions about why we have so many different reasons for no longer being Christians. That would imply that we should respond in such a way as to make one wonder just exactly what doctrine or dogma means.

 

That was the whole point of my drawing an answer from Thumbelina to this question: how does "God" benefit from Creation?

 

The intent was to get her to name any benefit, it really didn't matter what it was. The moment one says "God" could benefit from something one has placed a limit on "God" which should be impossible if "God" is unlimited. The goal is not to disprove God, but to make one question if "God" of the Bible can be God.

[par4dcourse]

Xians are by default trying to prove the unprovable. The only "proof" they can possibly posit is their infallible bible, so getting a straight answer may never happen

But it's fun to try.

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

Thumbelina: ... and can God create the most delicious tasting fruit and stuff Himself with it and never get fat? Why the heck would He? There are certain principles than God has; principles such as "eat for strength and not for drunkenness." Yeah, yeah, God does not need to eat for strength, He eats to fellowship with beings who need to eat for sustenance. He will NEVER gorge Himself.

Can God make a humongous whoopee cushion and go around making fart noises and cracking lewd jokes? Why the heck would He? It is NOT in the nature of God.

Dude, typical atheistic tripe: Can God make a rock so big He can't pick it up? http://carm.org/ques...he-cant-pick-it

 

The whole point I was trying to make is that if a god has the power to do whatever he wants, then it is possible to do things like make other beings that are as strong as he is. Just because it is possible for an all powerful god to do it doesn't mean that I think a god will do it or must do it. As for the paradox "Can God make a rock so big he can't pick it up?" When I read over that, I don't honestly know exactly how that paradox is a good reason to think that a god is not omnipotent for either not being able to make a rock too big or for not being able to pick it up. The way I see it, a god that has the power to do anything can make a rock too big for him to pick up, he just likely wouldn't because there would be no point to it. Of course, just because an all powerful god couldn't pick up the rock, which would only be impossible for him to do if he willed it to be impossible, doesn't mean he couldn't melt it with fire, make it explode, teleport it away, or simply just delete it. 

 

 

Thumbelina: Being a god that is omnipotent, only wise, only holy, there is none good but you, you set the standard and because of you all things consist, you HAVE to be worshiped. The ability to be good obedient is contingent upon love/worship/awe/gratefulness to YOU. Apart from you created beings can do NOTHING (worthwhile); selfishness will reign supreme (kinda like this planet).

His SEEMINGLY extreme reactions to people not worshiping Him is NOT because of Him but because His selfless nature is pained when lemmings are heading toward the cliff's edge.

 

So a god can't be holy or wise without commanding its creations to worship? A god that creates lesser beings could certainly teach them what being selfless is all about and why it's a good thing without behaving exactly how one would expect a narcissist with god powers to behave. A god that taught its creations this and then truly deserved to be worshiped for its actions would be worshiped. There would be no need to command worship or to punish those who don't. If a god created beings that certainly could be selfless and did not have a desire to be selfish, the only reasons that god would not be worshiped would be if he truly didn't deserve it.

 

 

 

Thumbelina: God does not program all humans to sin (James 1:13). Sin is written in our DNA (devil's nature acquired), because of our first parents, because of their stupid choice but God as Creator can recreate us and change our DNA (Divine Nature Acquired). There is love because He did create us with a yearning for Him (Living life acknowledged this), see Ecc 3:11, his image is not totally obliterated in us which is WHY we can still be altruistic (even atheists ).

It is not in the Divine nature to torture finite beings infinitely. Lucky you for not being around any narcissists, Jesus woke me up and had been teaching me the bible for some years, He caused people to be attracted to me but Satan was also stirred and a person whom I consider to be narcissistic was watching me and imitating me and giving me the evil eye (extremely evil). When you look up the traits of a narcissist she had many of them plus I was around another narcissist and they behave similarly in certain instances.

 

Ok then, so what is just about this? If the first two humans disobey and learn what sin is, why is it just for the future generations to be programmed with a desire to sin that they can't resist without being saved? If sin is "written in our DNA" then it's true, the sinful nature is a programming to sin. I've also got to ask, how exactly do you know Jesus was teaching you the Bible and you didn't just learn it all on your own, or maybe decided exactly what you wanted to believe about the scripture. If Jesus taught you, then ask Jesus to show me the Bible study lessons. Lol, there is a joke in there, but still, if Jesus taught you the Bible, then I need some confirmation from him.

 

 

Thumbelina: *sigh* You still cannot compare sentient beings with animals with regards to worth. God ordained that animals were to be and are always to be, LOWER than man (Satan wants man to think that they are on the same footing as or lesser than animals hence him pushing the agenda of us being common ancestors to them; it's Romans 1:25 in action!). The ideal situation was for no death but since man was given choices death did come to pass but God will create more animals on the new earth. All we can do in the meantime is try to preserve life and prevent pain as much as possible. Maybe by not eating the animals when there are other options such as fruits, nuts, vegetables, whole grains etc.? It'll preserve human lives as well as the lives of animals.

 

I still do not see what is just about punishing animals whose brains don't function the same way as human brains and were not given souls, apparently, for something that was beyond their control. The animals other than humans can still feel pain and die. Your god is not just if he makes the other animals suffer and die because a pair of humans decided to be morons and do something other than what their god said to do.

 

 

Thumbelina: No barrel, man. In John 15:15 Jesus says I don't want you to serve me and my Father as slaves anymore. He wants us to relate to Him as a friend. He came in person to show what God is like. He gave Himself while we were still His enemies, i mean, who does that?!

 

Ok, I think I get it now. First, he's all nice and says, "Hey bro, wazzup? Wana be my buddy bro? I don't want you to be my slaves anymore and neither does Dad. Come on, how about we be friends, hmm? Come on, I killed myself just to save your ass from my dad and his thirst for blood."

 

Response: "No thanks. I didn't ask for you to commit suicide for me, I didn't ask to be created, and what the hell is wrong with God the father if he needed you to commit suicide just to save me from himself?"

 

Jesus: "YOU GONNA DIE BITCH!" And then he rips the person into shreds and throws the pieces into a giant furnace.

 

Ok, so no gun. Just nice in the beginning and then suddenly not so much anymore. Basically when he apparently dies for the sins of humans, he just passes on another debt they have to pay. First, two humans sin, then all of the humans suddenly owe the Bible god their lives because they've all been cursed with sin genes and then when Jesus kills himself (or was it Yahweh that killed himself? Or was he just killing part of himself?), all humans are still in debt, but they also get one more debt. To pay off the second debt you are required to completely devote yourself to him 100% You have to love him more than everyone else, despite the fact that he just leaves you on the Earth, promising to return in a little while, only to not do it of course (maybe he lied?), and despite the fact that he is also at fault for heaping the first debt on to you to begin with and instead of saving you from it, just gives you an extra one. No thanks.

 

 

Thumbelina: Well, for the diligent student of the Word or even for a simple person who allows the HS to talk to them, they will see the nuances in the texts, they will see that in some instances it says God hardens Pharaoh's heart and some instances it says that Pharaoh's heart was hardened. It's like a bully (Pharaoh who represents Satan) oppressing a student (slaves represents us and mostly those who believe i.e.) and Mr Miyagi (Moses represents God) steps in to defuse the situation. Mr Miyagi talks to the bully but the bully is just so defiant, Miyagi's gentleness causes the bully to harden his own heart and he obstinately refuses to stop tormenting the students. He sees Miyagi as a sucker!

 

Therefore Miyagi has to up the ante, he gives some minor karate moves to subdue the bully a little but the bully laughs it off, he hardens his (own) heart. He continues to torment the slaves and Miyagi ups the ante again, bully laughs off the first few blows and he even increases his tormenting of the slaves. Miyagi steadily ups the ante and shows the bully his superior fighting skills but that bully is a stubborn so-and-so and he just gets more obstinate and this caused Miyagi to harden the bully's heart (Miyagi is in a sort of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. The bully is just determined not to believe in the powerful Miyagi).

Each time Miyagi gives the bully a reprieve, the bully hardens his own heart, his deluded self just keeps thinkin' "sucker!!" This goes on for awhile but eventually Miyagi had to deliver some forceful blows, the bully had to cry "uncle!" He lets the students out but his damn heart is HARD as flint. A man convinced against his will, is of the SAME opinion still.

Pharaoh can acquiesce to God's might but he won't worship him in spirit and in truth and in his hard heart he'll still be wishing that he can enslave God's children. Oh wait, he did send his army to get them back and what does the narrative say happened?

 

Dude, I recommend you learn how to read the bible in context and ask the Holy spirit help you see the nuances and spiritual lessons in the verses, then you won't see God as a monster.

 

Well, at first it looks like Pharaoh did harden his own heart, but then later on, it appears the Bible god begins to harden his heart for him, just so he can show off. Also, instead of just punishing the pharaoh every time, he punishes all of Egypt! I just don't see how your analogy of the school bully and the teacher is accurate. Maybe a better one would be that the bully obviously does torment the student at first, but then the big, mean, and scary teacher comes along and then he orders another student to tell the bully to stop tormenting the victimized student, but then the teacher says to the bully, "Don't stop. Tell that other student you will not stop tormenting the victim." Then the bully does what the teacher says and the teacher goes off and beats up the bully's family. He beats up the bully's siblings, parents, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, all of them.

 

Unfortunately I can't ask the Holy Spirit to help because I don't believe it exists. I thought you had to believe in that sort of thing to get it to help. Besides, if I did ask and it did try to help, I would expect the Holy Spirit to be an invisible apologist who makes up crap so his god sounds like less of a monster.

 

 

Thumbelina: I've never had a fear of hell, I felt the squishy loving feeling for God when I was like 5 or 6 years old but never had the fear of hell. I always seemed to know that God was kind.

 

That's good for you.

 

 

Thumbelina: Skeptics aren't the arbiters of truth and they still have to face the judge. Sorry you did not see evidences of God's love. It would not have helped you develop a relationship with Him if you believed the doctrine that says God is a sadistic torturer who tortures people for eternity.

 

Just being skeptics of a belief doesn't make a person an arbiter of truth obviously, but if a person chooses to believe in things that can actually be proven to be true and are skeptical of things that have very little to no evidence to prove them, or at the very least, if a skeptical person has not yet encountered the evidence if there is evidence, I would say they have a fairly decent idea of what is true. With this type of person, if they just did not encounter the evidence yet, I would expect that if they did encounter the evidence needed to believe something, they would certainly admit they were wrong and accept the idea they were skeptical of. I happen to think that a lot of people here on ex-C are very much like that.

 

It is true that believing in the doctrine of eternal, never-ending torture in Hell certainly didn't help at all to develop a relationship with your god. Originally when I first believed, I really didn't put much thought into the belief of never-ending torture, but after I already believed is when I did think about it and the relationship I thought I had did not last. Since you don't believe in the doctrine of eternal torment that never ends, it makes me think that what you believe about your god makes him seem quite a bit less crazy than I thought he was, but I'm still not sure he's something I should trust if he really does exist. I've been researching and it looks like a case may have been made about the possibility of the belief in eternal torment possibly being a misunderstanding of the scriptures, but I'm not completely sure how strong the case is.

[florduh]

His selfless nature is pained when lemmings are heading toward the cliff's edge.

 

That's simply idiotic since it was HE who ostensibly made the cliff, made the lemmings, and then gave them the nature to jump off.

 

Of course he had knowledge of the outcome before even starting the lemming project. Why do it if it will only inflict pain on both the lemmings and himself?

[Ravenstar]

Damn you Florduh, for bringing the omniscience into it...

 

[DrGuitar]

Methinks Thumbelina is gaming us...either that or Christ-insanity is truly idiotic and nonsensical...oh wait...it IS!! Actually both could be true..but then she wouldnt be much of a Christian since they are supposed to act in earnest, but then they usually do not...so once again we circle around trying to have a meaningful dialog with the insane..