Some perspectives

[D. Paul]

Vigile says

I trusted, now I don't.

 

Then you belong in the John 6:66-69 and the Heb 6 category. No mystery. Those who are His will be kept until the end and no one (not even onesself) can snatch them out of His hand. Those who "fall away" simply prove they were never his. The language is clear. You've heard of the "form of godliness" passage? 2Tim 3:5

[Vigile]

Vigile says

Then you belong in the John 6:66-69 and the Heb 6 category. No mystery. Those who are His will be kept until the end and no one (not even onesself) can snatch them out of His hand. Those who "fall away" simply prove they were never his. The language is clear. You've heard of the "form of godliness" passage? 2Tim 3:5

 

Ah... So you are a Calvinist. Explains a lot.

[crazy-tiger]

Crazy-Tiger,

 

Did you notice when you broke down the meaning of that Hebrew verse about the bible giving evidence that ex-christianity being possible (and the consequences) therefore the christian claim that ex-christianity is impossible (the old fake christian argument), that D. Paul not only abandoned the claim that we don't understand the verses context......he abandoned the verses ENTIRELY when you used them to point out the BS of the "fake christian" argument.

 

He mis-directed immediately. "Pay no attention to those verses......look at these verses over here".

 

Suddenly the Hebrew verses conveyed meaning that defied general christian belief....and instead of defending those verses (don't ask me how), he abandoned them in favor of other verses.

 

Beautiful modern evidence of how the christians really end up believing whatever they want to depending on which verses they uphold, and which ones prove too "inconvenient".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes... I noticed... And I'm not falling for it.

 

If he really wants to try that, I'm just going to keep on dragging him right back to his arrogant mistake.

 

 

Why? Because I've found that rubbing their faces into what they did wrong is one of the most effective ways of teaching dumb animals not to do it again. (and it can be fun )

[Dio]

Vigile says

Then you belong in the John 6:66-69 and the Heb 6 category. No mystery. Those who are His will be kept until the end and no one (not even onesself) can snatch them out of His hand. Those who "fall away" simply prove they were never his. The language is clear. You've heard of the "form of godliness" passage? 2Tim 3:5

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry, but this is all a moot point since the Bible is demonstrably false and the rest of this is make believe.

 

In actuality, ex-christians were every bit as brainwashed as D. Paul here, but have had an awakening to a reality that DP has not had yet. In a sense, he is right that 'ex-church goers' is what we were because there is no such thing as someone 'belonging to god' or 'being in his hands' or whatever. Sorry to state the obvious, but this is just an endless circular argument.

 

My 2 cents.

[D. Paul]

CrazyTiger,

Are you really sure you want to make that argument? Are you really sure that those who were called Disciples (a personal follower of Christ during his life, especially one of the twelve Apostles) rejected Christ and his teachings?

 

I said no such thing, nor have you painted me into a corner. Jesus knew and identified those who were true and false "disciples". Judas was with them but was never His true disciple.

 

White Raven,

Did you notice when you broke down the meaning of that Hebrew verse about the bible giving evidence that ex-christianity being possible (and the consequences) therefore the christian claim that ex-christianity is impossible (the old fake christian argument), that D. Paul not only abandoned the claim that we don't understand the verses context......he abandoned the verses ENTIRELY when you used them to point out the BS of the "fake christian" argument.

 

He mis-directed immediately. "Pay no attention to those verses......look at these verses over here".

 

This was no "mis-direction". Tiger claims to have dealt with the text honestly. He ignored the rest of Hebrews and any other instance for clarification. I gave a specific instance and drew the parallel to those being spoken of in Hebrews. They're the same people.

 

You wanna stay in the chapter? Fine. if it were simply your choice to "come and go" as you please.. to believe or disbelieve, then who is it who is going to "come back"? Would you prefer to crucify him yet again in order to secure your salvation? Impossible. There is counterfeit faith, counterfeit repentance (Judas) and only pretension. (2 Tim 3:5) Deal with the rest of the verses and those that clarify.

[D. Paul]

Ah... So you are a Calvinist.  Explains a lot.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And so deal with the verses.

[D. Paul]

Yes... I noticed... And I'm not falling for it.

 

If he really wants to try that, I'm just going to keep on dragging him right back to his arrogant mistake.

Which was...?

[Vigile]

And so deal with the verses.

 

Why should I? I believe the whole thing is a fairy tale. I was only trying to argue from your perspective. The bible is just another book to me.

[Vigile]

Which was...?

 

That you changed up, jumping to other scriptures when you were confronted with those in Hebrews.

[D. Paul]

That you changed up, jumping to other scriptures when you were confronted with those in Hebrews.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And then dealt with them accordingly...

[D. Paul]

Why should I?  I believe the whole thing is a fairy tale.  I was only trying to argue from your perspective.  The bible is just another book to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True, but the fact that you're incapable doesn't prevent you from trying to use it against someone.

[Vigile]

True, but the fact that you're incapable doesn't prevent you from trying to use it against someone.

 

Incapable?

[Mythra]

I really don't know why we even bother to argue scriptures with a thumper. To DPaul, the book of John is God-transcribed gospel. Jesus' words are as accurate as if they were taken down by a court transcriber.

 

To us, we understand that the book of John relies heavily on the Philonic philosophies of the Son of God and the Logos. It absorbs other elements from the Ur-Lukan gospel of Marcion. It was not written by a disciple named John, it was written by a greek who had limited understanding of Palestine's geography. It was composed at least sixty years after the approximated date when the story has Jesus dying, and thirty years after the other gospels were penned.

 

It has more theology written into it than the three synoptic gospels combined. It's the only gospel that requires an acceptance of the Christological claims of Jesus for salvation. Jesus' words in John are night and day from Jesus' words in Mt, Mk, and Lk. His words are, however, very similar to the words in the epistles written by the same author.

 

Tell me again why I should give a shit what "Jesus" "said" in John chapter 6 about whether or not I was a true believer.

[Java]

I remember a very good quote I heard once:

 

"Someone shoot this babbling motherfucker in the head and shut him up."

 

Reminds me of the "Jahoovian Logic" of that crazy Hare Krishna kook on alt.atheist:

 

D.PAULIAN LOGIC

============

 

Rule 1) If it's not in the Bible, or not what D. Paul believes, it's wrong.

Rule 2) When presented with evidence, ignore it, bleat strawmen, and refer

back to rule 1).

Rule 3) Reading a book about an invisible, "all-just" genocidal maniac is the only way to gain knowledge. If questioned about such bizarre practices, refer to rule 1).

Rule 4) When asked to defend the Bible, refer to rule 1).

Rule 5) When asked for evidence, refer to rule 1).

Rule 6) When all else fails, refer to rule 1).

[Mr. Neil]

This guy is such a pussy. I have nothing more to say in this topic.

 

Is your last name Gastrich, by any chance?

 

Or Eyeliner?

[Ouroboros]

This guy is such a pussy.  I have nothing more to say in this topic.

 

Is your last name Gastrich, by any chance?

 

Or Eyeliner?

I put him on ignore. Lately I realized there are people that you can't argue with, because they have such a solid and fixed fantasy, they're in denial of truth, and there's no way to even do a rational reasoning with them.

 

If you would bring up paradoxes of God, they just claim that God is beyond logic and paradoxes.

 

If you claim you don't believe, then they ask you to pray for faith. And when you tell them that you did and you still don't believe they go back to that God must exist anyway and that God only answer prayers based on his will.

 

There's no actual logic or reasoning that can be done.

 

When you bring up a Bible verse that is a clear and literally contradiction to another verse, then they make excuses how the verse is "supposed" to be understood, but at the same time, the next verse has to be interpreted literally by them. If flip-flops between literal and spiritual undertstanding in mid-verses, and the knowledge is based on revelations from some old preachers 1-150 years back. And tomorrow there will be a new revelation, so now suddenly the verse have to be interpreted a little bit different to match reality.

 

It's just like minors smoking and drinking alcohol is not moral anymore, according to Christians. That is a result from medical studies that forced the government to establish health laws against it. Before that, no Christian had any objection to kids smoking or drinking. God suddenly "revealed" his updated moral code, very conveniently, after the evil-atheist-medical-researchers made a statement. The true moral code in society is not driven by the religious people, but by the opinion of the masses. And that opinion changes with time according to science and culture.

[NorthenSun]

In Somalia today, the slaughter of Christians continues.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

D. Paul, you make it sound like this is a bad thing. ........................ just kidding.

 

Seriously though, what have you personally done about this situation? Why haven't you driven or flown to Washington, D.C. and protested outside the White House. Bush claims to be a good Christian, so surely he must share your concern. He could move the troops out of Iraq and send them to Somalia where they might be able to do something to stop the slaughter. The only thing that would happen in Iraq is that the "godless" Muslims would continue to beat the Shiite out of each other, which is ok, right?. Or better yet, why don't you fly over to Somalia and try to personally intervene?

 

Pick up your cross, man.....nah....easier just to flame a few ex-Christians on the net.

[All Gods Fail]

I put him on ignore. Lately I realized there are people that you can't argue with, because they have such a solid and fixed fantasy, they're in denial of truth, and there's no way to even do a rational reasoning with them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I told you guys not to bother arguing with a calvinist!

 

They are a lost cause. If they've studied the history of Calvin and still think the guy had any spiritual insight, how do you reason against that? Their belief is all about judgement and condemnation. No love, no compassion, no soul-saving - just point the finger.

[Ouroboros]

I told you guys not to bother arguing with a calvinist!

 

They are a lost cause. If they've studied the history of Calvin and still think the guy had any spiritual insight, how do you reason against that? Their belief is all about judgement and condemnation. No love, no compassion, no soul-saving - just point the finger.

 

Because of the last week of Calvinistic Attacks, I made up a little story.

 

There was this man that had a fruit farm. On a sign to his farm it said "Red and Green Oranges".

This made me curious how oranges could be red or green, since we know they're supposed to be orange when they are ripe.

 

So I went up to the farm, and met with the owner, and asked him, what kind of oranges he had, since they were not orange.

 

He started to describe these oranges, it explained that they became green and red when they were rip, and the had the texture and consistency of apples, and they even tasted like apples. But the most curious thing about this red and green oranges were that they grew on apple trees.

 

I tried to reason with the owner, and I insisted that these fruits he had must actually be apples and not oranges, since they taste like, look like apples, and grow on apple trees. But in total lack of luck, I couldn't reason with this man, he kept on insisting that these fruits were oranges.

 

It all came to the question, if he had a real apple in front of him and one of these red/green oranges, could he make a distinction between them, and he answered that he could. And his explanation was that the apples tasted apples, while the red and green oranges tasted like red and green oranges, which taste the same as apples.

 

After a short while, I just gave up, and left the farm. I bought a few red/green oranges, and tried them. They tasted just like apples.

 

On the road ahead I discovered that there were plenty of farms with oranges and apples, but no one claimed to have the red and green oranges. But the funny part was, I didn't stop to buy anything from the other farmers. And I realized the true intention of the silly claim that the apples were red and green oranges... it was not about the truth or facts, but about sales.

[crazy-tiger]

CrazyTiger,

I said no such thing, nor have you painted me into a corner. Jesus knew and identified those who were true and false "disciples". Judas was with them but was never His true disciple.

So you haven't just said that his disciples who rejected his teachings were not his disciples?

Honestly, if you are a false disciple, then you are not a disciple at all.

 

Now, I ask again, are you really sure you want to make that argument? Are you really sure that those who were called Disciples (a personal follower of Christ during his life, especially one of the twelve Apostles) rejected Christ and his teachings?

 

See... if there were disciples who left, then they were, by your argument, never disciples in the first place. Personally, I don't have a problem with that...

What I DO have a problem with is that your argument that Hebrews 6:4-6 is talking about disciples who leave the faith only, now falls flat since a disciple who leaves the faith doesn't exist! (by your argument, that is)

 

For your argument to be true, it has to be false, which basically means that you've fucked it up good and proper... and it was all your own work. I didn't have to do anything, except let you keep talking and allow your foot to gracefully follow a parabolic curve until it lodged itself at the top of your gullet.

White Raven,

This was no "mis-direction". Tiger claims to have dealt with the text honestly. He ignored the rest of Hebrews and any other instance for clarification. I gave a specific instance and drew the parallel to those being spoken of in Hebrews. They're the same people.

You wanna stay in the chapter? Fine. if it were simply your choice to "come and go" as you please.. to believe or disbelieve, then who is it who is going to "come back"? Would you prefer to crucify him yet again in order to secure your salvation? Impossible. There is counterfeit faith, counterfeit repentance (Judas) and only pretension. (2 Tim 3:5) Deal with the rest of the verses and those that clarify.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We CAN'T just come and go as we please... if you think that is what we're trying to say, then you've made yet another mistake. (hell, you've made that many, one more won't make any difference now)

 

We HAD our salvation, we rejected it, WE CANNOT GET IT BACK!

 

 

Are you trying to say that we can? Are you setting yourself up in direct contradiction to the Bible?

 

Are you really that determined to spend eternity in hell with us?

[crazy-tiger]

This guy is such a pussy.  I have nothing more to say in this topic.

 

Is your last name Gastrich, by any chance?

 

Or Eyeliner?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He can't be aclone...

 

he doesn't have the same vapid ignorance or angry self-righteousness as

[Vixentrox]

Blue Eyeliner...haha...not heard that name in a while.

[SkepticOfBible]

Which has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity...

Even if that's true, that's not the point I was trying to make.

 

You attempted to associate Hitler with atheism, which is the classic Christian cheapshot. Here, let me freshen your memory.

 

Hitler was in no way an atheist! That was my point! Go back and re-read what I said.

 

I wasn't even trying to say that Hitler was a Christian or accurately represented Christian values, and yet you insert Christianity into your rebuttal as though I did!

 

No wait! I'll save you the trouble!

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hitler was beyond a doubt a christian, and a great fan of Martin Luther King. He even included some comments from his idols book "The Jews And Their Lies"

 

In fact the "KrystalNacht" celebration happened on Martin Luthers birthday. Pretty much they were inspired by the following section from his book

 

"First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly - and I myself was unaware of it - will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know."

 

"Accordingly, it must and dare not be considered a trifling matter but a most serious one to seek counsel against this and to save our souls from the Jews, that is, from the devil and from eternal death. My advice, as I said earlier, is:

First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss in sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire. That would demonstrate to God our serious resolve and be evidence to all the world that it was in ignorance that we tolerated such houses, in which the Jews have reviled God, our dear Creator and Father, and his Son most shamefully up till now but that we have now given them their due reward."

 

He certainly laid the foundation of one of the biggest genocide in history

 

Jews and their Lies

 

Peaceful Message of Chrisitianity

[Vigile]

There's no actual logic or reasoning that can be done.

 

That's why I keep telling him, just admit, you believe because you want to. He is a numbskull. And a mean spirited Calvinist at that.

[Fweethawt]

Hitler was beyond a doubt a christian,

and a great fan of Martin Luther King.

Oh really? This is news to me.