The Cross And The Resurrection

[believer]

I would also suggest not looking at the circumstances if they seem to be too overwheming, such as thinking that God could not heal him because of the extensive damage. God has done regenerative miracles before, and he can do so again.

Good. Then let's see it.

 

By saying this I am trying to boost your faith a little so you can receive your miracle. But if you don't have the faith for it, it won't happen.

If I have to believe before I can see evidence for God to help me believe, then it's nothing but snake oil.

 

I demand to see the product before I buy it. I don't buy secret mystery boxes. I was Christian and tried to be faithful, it didn't work. So now the option is reversed. I have to see it before I believe it. Simple as that. If your God can't do it, I won't believe in your God.

 

I feel for your son, and I will pray for him. I don't guaranee that God will say yes, because as long as you are asking for it to take place as a sign that God is real, I don't think He will say yes.

Exactly. God won't say yes because he doesn't exist. And that whole excuse is nothing but a chicken's disclaimer.

 

You must start with the premise that God is real. Haven't you ever looked up into the clear, blue sky? Where does it stop? If it does stop somewhere, what is beyond the stopping point? When I sawe these things, it seemed to me before that infinity was impossible, but I found proof of infinity in the creation.

No. I have to start with the evidence for God. So far the evidence is equal to zero. I don't see God when I look up into the sky. I have studied astronomy enough to know that God isn't there.

 

I don't know how you could have looked at the creation as a young child and not realized the existence of a designer that designed and created everything that you saw, unless you were brainwashed by those evolution videos where they say over and over again, "billions and billions of years ago..." until you believe it.

I did believe as a young child. I became a Christian at the age of 7. I started to pray in tongues at 11 and got baptized at 12. I can still speak in tongues. I've been on mission trips. I walked the streets of downtown cities carrying a Bible and engaging in conversations with random people to convince them about Jesus. I spent money on going to a one year seminar. I tithed (it was automatically drawn from my account). And on, and on, and on...

 

I didn't care if evolution was true or not when I lost my faith. I knew some things about evolution, but I wasn't convinced about it until a few years ago, that is, after I lost my faith. So no, I didn't not lose my faith because of evolution. I even can accept theistic evolution, under one condition, and that conditions is... show me that God exists. Don't use words. Show me. That's the challenge, and that's what you're chicken out from.

 

If you were able to speak in tongues, then you tasted of the heavenly gift and the powers of the age to come. If you were to come back to Christ now you would be crucifying him all over again and putting him to an open shame. So of course He is not going to prove Himself to you now, He gave you plenty of evidence before. I don't know why you lost your faith, but I feel sorry for you, because now you can't come back to faith and it was the only way you were going to get to heaven for eternity. Wow, I feel really really sorry for you.

[Ouroboros]

If you were able to speak in tongues, then you tasted of the heavenly gift and the powers of the age to come. If you were to come back to Christ now you would be crucifying him all over again and putting him to an open shame. So of course He is not going to prove Himself to you now,

Then why are you here? This is a website of Ex-Christians. Pretty much all of us are in that same boat, so your attempt is futile on this website.

 

He gave you plenty of evidence before.

No, he didn't. Sure, speaking in tongues is cool, but I have seen people who are not (and never were) Christians being able to do glossolalia as well. It's like improvising in music, but with words instead. So it's not a supernatural phenomenon.

 

I want to see something that I can't explain naturally, like my son walking again. Come on. Take the challenge.

 

I don't know why you lost your faith, but I feel sorry for you, because now you can't come back to faith and it was the only way you were going to get to heaven for eternity. Wow, I feel really really sorry for you.

Ok? I feel sorry for your feeling sorry.

[buffettphan]

 

They can't see outside their little fantasy world. They can't see outside the box, and the box is extremely small.

 

Not to mention that the lid is on the box so tightly they are oxygen-deprived and (on the verge of?) brain-dead.

[oddbird1963]

 

 

It is also true that Jesus did much more than what was reorded in the gospels. See John 21:25.

 

 

Since the first gospels were written down about 50 - 100 years after he supposedly died, and they are very close to many Greek myth stories, they were probably embellished just a bit.

 

 

Who says that's when they were written? A documentary on PBS? Those things are biased: they use scholars who do not believe in the first place and who make asserions not based in fact.

 

In all actuality the gospels were written within a very short timeframe of when Jesus died and rose again. The epistles also.

 

Where do you get this information about scholars? Even the most conservative evangelical scholars accept that the dating of the gospels is within the range Stryper noted. In fact, most apologists try to demonstrate that the 50 - 100 year range is very short compared to other documents of history we have. It's the shortness of that date range (50 - 100 yrs) that they try to pass off as proof that the stories being told are reliable history.

 

 

That's a very un-Christian thing to accuse scholars of. You are judging them without knowing them, unless you have facts that can show this intellect blinding bias to be true. But that's just it, you are making assertions all over this thread without presenting evidence. You're naive and ignorant. I some christian circles I know, I just paid you a compliment.

[Ouroboros]

 

They can't see outside their little fantasy world. They can't see outside the box, and the box is extremely small.

 

The lid is on the box so tightly they are oxygen-deprived and (on the verge of?) brain-dead.

 

And it's all painted black inside.

[stryper]

 

 

Who says that's when they were written? A documentary on PBS? Those things are biased: they use scholars who do not believe in the first place and who make asserions not based in fact.

 

In all actuality the gospels were written within a very short timeframe of when Jesus died and rose again. The epistles also.

 

 

Let's take a wiki walk

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel#Dating

 

Mark c 68-73, and 65-70

 

 

notice the little 36 and 37 clicking on it takes you to the citation.

 

36 has a link to Raymond Brown

 

Clicking on his name takes you

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown

 

The Reverend Raymond Edward Brown, S.S. (May 22, 1928 - August 8, 1998), was an American Roman Catholic priest, a member of the Sulpician Fathers and a major Biblical scholar of his era. He was regarded as a specialist concerning the hypothetical ‘Johannine community’, which he speculated contributed to the authorship of the Gospel of John, and he also wrote influential studies on the birth and death of Jesus. Brown was professor emeritus at the Protestant Union Theological Seminary (UTS) in New York, where he taught for 29 years. He was the first Roman Catholic professor to gain tenure there, where he earned a reputation as a superior lecturer.^[1]

 

 

But he's not a True Christian ^TM because he's catholic. Doesn't matter. He's not an atheist.

[believer]

 

 

I would say that the internal evidence of the Bible proves it is the word of God. The Quran and the Book of Mormon do not have prophecies within them; the Bible has prophecies that have been fulfilled to a very great extent.

 

I don't rememeber all of the numbers, but there are a bunch of prophecies that are fulfilled by the life of Jesus alone. For only a few of those prophecies to be fulfilled correctly, here are the odds. If you filled the entire state of Texas with quarters three feet deep, and marked one of those quarters, and then told a blind man to find that quarter at random without starting anywhere near the marked quarter, it is the same probability for only a few of these prophecies to hav been fulfilled correctly, as for the blind man to find the marked quarter. It is something like 1 in 10 to the 17th power, 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000 or more. In fact, I think it is way more.

 

Then there are other prophecies that were fulfilled by Jesus and other events: not one of them has been fulfilled inaccurately, the only ones that have not been fulfilled are the ones that have not yet come to pass.

 

 

The bible has be translated, re-translated, edited, change, re-ordered, revised, etc literally 1000's of times. Those prophecies were most likely edited after the fact. The fact that the only place these prophecies can be found is IN the bible creates circular logic. You believe in the bible because the bible tell you so.

 

That is a logical fallacy. So the prophecies in the bible are true because they are fulfilled by other books contained in the bible.

 

Illogical.

 

That's what I mean by you people being faced with evidence and simply rejecting it out of hand. You start with a premise of unbelief and all you will do when faced with evidence for faith is to reject that evidence however you can.

 

btw, the Bible is a book of history, it is actually 66 books written by 40 different authors over a period of 2,000 years. What one author prophesied was fulfilled in a historical book written by a different author. So it is not circular reasoning.

 

How about Israel becoming a nation again? That was prophesied in Isaiah 66:7-10. This was not fulfiled in the history of the Bible, but in modern day history.

[Ouroboros]

That's what I mean by you people being faced with evidence and simply ejecting it out of hand. You start with a premise of unbelief

That is, and should be, the default position before investigating anything. If you start your premise at belief without evidence, then all "evidence" will qualify for you to prove your bias.

[believer]

If you were able to speak in tongues, then you tasted of the heavenly gift and the powers of the age to come. If you were to come back to Christ now you would be crucifying him all over again and putting him to an open shame. So of course He is not going to prove Himself to you now,

Then why are you here? This is a website of Ex-Christians. Pretty much all of us are in that same boat, so your attempt is futile on this website.

 

 

I'm not sure why I'm here. Maybe there are one or more people here who thought they were Christians but weren't, i.e. they simply tried Christianity expecting God to prove that He was real without them starting with any measure of real faith. They may have thought that they had faith, but their asking God to prove Himself was the sign to Him and everyone else that they didn't really believe. If they believed already, why ask God to prove HImself? So they could believe?

 

No, they didn't believe in the first place, and that ought to bring them hope, because if they never believed then they didn't partake of the Holy Ghost and the powers of the age to come and such and such spoken of in Hebrews 6.

[buffettphan]

Posted Today, 05:52 PM

 

 

 

believer, on 03 November 2011 - 05:48 PM, said:

 

 

If you were to come back to Christ now you would be crucifying him all over again and putting him to an open shame.

 

 

B-b-b-but what about all the other True Trolls Christians who've been preaching the "once saved always saved" dogma to us.

 

Oh, I'm soooooo confused.

 

But I don't want jesus to have another bad weekend, so I'll just stay my happy heathen self. Unless of course this guy is the real deal and actually produces the evidence. Then, sorry jesus, you'll just have to be crucified again. Blame your additional shame and pain on believer -- and your not-so-nice daddy who knows all things.

[BrotherJosh]

That is, and should be, the default position before investigating anything. If you start your premise at belief without evidence, then all "evidence" will qualify for you to prove your bias.

 

Reminds me of the Outsider Test For Faith:

 

When believers criticize the other faiths they reject, they use reason and science to do so. They assume these other religions have the burden of proof. They assume human not divine authors to their holy book(s). They assume a human not a divine origin to their faiths.

 

Believers do this when rejecting other faiths. So dispensing all of the red herrings about morality and a non-material universe, the OTF simply asks believers to do unto their own faith what they do unto other faiths. All it asks of them is to be consistent.

 

The OTF asks why believers operate on a double standard. If that's how they reject other faiths then they should apply that same standard to their own. Let reason and science rather than faith be their guide. Assume your own faith has the burden of proof. Assume human rather than divine authors to your holy book(s) and see what you get. If there is a divine author behind the texts it should be known even with that initial skeptical assumption.

 

So the OTF uses the exact same standard that believers use when rejecting other religions. If there is any inconsistency at all it is not with the OTF. It is how believers assess truth claims. For it should only take a moment’s thought to realize that if there is a God who wants people born into different religious cultures to believe, who are outsiders, then that religious faith SHOULD pass the OTF.

 

If Christians want to reject the OTF then either they must admit they have a double standard for examining religious faiths, one for their own faith and a different one for others, or their faith was not made to pass the OTF in the first place. In either case all of their arguments against the OTF are based on red herrings, special pleading, begging the question, the denigrating science, and an ignorance that I can only attribute to delusional blindness.

 

http://debunkingchri...otf-is-not.html

 

A key part of it is the fact that most people will believe the mainstream religion of the culture in which they are raised. So you are raised in Afghanistan you'll most likely be Muslim, India Hindu, Mexico Catholic and Southern North America and odds are you'll be Christian Protestant (or one of the branches of it). So with now 7 billion people on the planet all believing vastly different things the natural position we (even the religious) all take with other religions is that of skepticism, this just takes it a step further and asks people to be as equally skeptical about their own religious beliefs.

 

http://debunkingchri...-girls-for.html

[agnosticator]

Matthew 5:5

New International Version (NIV)

⁵ Blessed are the meek,

for they will inherit the earth.

Colossians 3:12

Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved,

clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.

 

1 Peter 3:15

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

 

 

Galatians 5:22-24

 

New International Version (NIV)

 

²² But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, ²³ gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. ²⁴ Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

 

Believer, where is your Christian character? You better ask for forgiveness, or you will be kicked from the True Christian Club!

[oddbird1963]

 

 

I would say that the internal evidence of the Bible proves it is the word of God. The Quran and the Book of Mormon do not have prophecies within them; the Bible has prophecies that have been fulfilled to a very great extent.

 

I don't rememeber all of the numbers, but there are a bunch of prophecies that are fulfilled by the life of Jesus alone. For only a few of those prophecies to be fulfilled correctly, here are the odds. If you filled the entire state of Texas with quarters three feet deep, and marked one of those quarters, and then told a blind man to find that quarter at random without starting anywhere near the marked quarter, it is the same probability for only a few of these prophecies to hav been fulfilled correctly, as for the blind man to find the marked quarter. It is something like 1 in 10 to the 17th power, 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000 or more. In fact, I think it is way more.

 

Then there are other prophecies that were fulfilled by Jesus and other events: not one of them has been fulfilled inaccurately, the only ones that have not been fulfilled are the ones that have not yet come to pass.

 

 

The bible has be translated, re-translated, edited, change, re-ordered, revised, etc literally 1000's of times. Those prophecies were most likely edited after the fact. The fact that the only place these prophecies can be found is IN the bible creates circular logic. You believe in the bible because the bible tell you so.

 

That is a logical fallacy. So the prophecies in the bible are true because they are fulfilled by other books contained in the bible.

 

Illogical.

 

That's what I mean by you people being faced with evidence and simply rejecting it out of hand. You start with a premise of unbelief and all you will do when faced with evidence for faith is to reject that evidence however you can.

 

btw, the Bible is a book of history, it is actually 66 books written by 40 different authors over a period of 2,000 years. What one author prophesied was fulfilled in a historical book written by a different author. So it is not circular reasoning.

 

How about Israel becoming a nation again? That was prophesied in Isaiah 66:7-10. This was not fulfiled in the history of the Bible, but in modern day history.

 

Quit whining at your failure to provide evidence, believer. You're making excuses for the fact that you can't come up with reasons. If you provide actual evidence it will be considered.

 

An appeal to fulfilled prophecies is a massive fail. I studied that for years while I was a believer and was unimpressed. Show one direct prophecy that can be shown to be fulfilled by Jesus with more than just a quote from the New testament (which does a piss poor job of using the Old testament, btw).

 

Speaking of bias. that Isaiah 66 passage makes no direct prediction about the the nation of Israel. It's a poetic passage that asks a bunch of rhetorical questions. Only a person looking for a Bible passage to fit their preconceived notions about the nation of Israel would even remotely have a chance of calling Isaiah 66:7-10 a fulfilled prophesy.

 

The Bible is a book of historical books like Louis La'mour's books are historical books. They are set in the past and some of the places referred to actually existed. that's where the whole "bible is a collection of history books" claim falls to pieces. once again, you need to show, with evidence, that these books are accurate portrayals of what took place in the past. C'mon! We're waiting!

 

I picture you sitting around with copies of "The Case for Christ" or "More than a Carpentar" all around you grabbing ideas from the table of contents. You really need to step up to the plate. Quit whining like a baby and show us the evidence.

[Thought2Much]

There is a scripture that says that even Jesus didn't do very many miracles in his own hometown because of their unbelief.

Or, they knew the guy while he was growing up and realized he was a bullshit artist.

 

What you should probably do is ask God for a measure of faith apart from Him proving Himself to you through some miracle. And remember that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. And know this also, that God in His sovereignty has the right to not heal your son. But if you teach your son about faith in Jesus Christ in such a way as to propagate that faith, he will ultimately be healed when he gets to heaven; he will receive a new gorified body that does not have any flaws.

Ah, yes, the old "you're not seeing miracles because you don't have enough faith" excuse. I love that one. Another wonderful Christian example of "blaming the victim." Telling amputees, the blind, and the lame that they just don't have enough faith. Telling people with terminal cancer that they just don't have enough faith. Or telling them that someone else in the room doesn't have enough faith, so no matter how much the person who wants to be healed believes, you can blame someone else. Or someone in the room has unconfessed sin, so God won't move while there's "sin in the camp."

 

I have heard all of this bullshit before. It was bullshit when other people said it, and it's bullshit when you say it.

 

Also, if God requires faith to do anything, how did he manage to create the entire universe? Are you telling me he's sitting up in heaven saying, "I want to do miracles, but these people just don't have faith, so I just can't! Why won't they let me show them how awesome I am?" Are you telling me that if one Hebrew leaving Egypt hadn't believed 100%, that God couldn't have parted the Red Sea? He just would have let the Egyptian soldiers slaughter everyone and say, "Oh well. That guy doesn't have enough faith. Too bad for all of those Hebrews, huh? I really wanted to do that miracle thing."

 

If one person in a thousand in a room can keep God from doing miracles, he's a rather weak God. What a pathetic, miserable, whiny, little God you serve.

[ConureDelSol]

If you were able to speak in tongues, then you tasted of the heavenly gift and the powers of the age to come. If you were to come back to Christ now you would be crucifying him all over again and putting him to an open shame. So of course He is not going to prove Himself to you now,

Then why are you here? This is a website of Ex-Christians. Pretty much all of us are in that same boat, so your attempt is futile on this website.

 

 

I'm not sure why I'm here. Maybe there are one or more people here who thought they were Christians but weren't, i.e. they simply tried Christianity expecting God to prove that He was real without them starting with any measure of real faith. They may have thought that they had faith, but their asking God to prove Himself was the sign to Him and everyone else that they didn't really believe. If they believed already, why ask God to prove HImself? So they could believe?

 

No, they didn't believe in the first place, and that ought to bring them hope, because if they never believed then they didn't partake of the Holy Ghost and the powers of the age to come and such and such spoken of in Hebrews 6.

 

I think you don't understand. Telling someone they didn't "believe in the first place" does NOT bring them hope. Many people on this forums gave up nearly everything for their faith. Some were preachers. Some of us were (or currently are) employed by churches. We have prayed, fasted, and tithed to the a point you cannot imagine. We have suffered and said that "God has a purpose in this. Something good will come out of this." We have seen others with such happiness and filled with what seems to be God and we have craved such an experience. So we give up everything for this "relationship" with God. We actually BELIEVE the Bible. We cry night after night in prayer asking why it is impossible for us to feel something...ANYTHING. For some of us, it would be like seeing our favorite food, prepared our favorite way and when we take a bite of it, there is nothing but air and we can taste nothing.

 

Telling someone they "didn't believe" is a terrible and dare I say un-Christlike assumption. How DARE you assume you know what we've experienced? What we've believed? What we've done for our faith? Have you ever given up your family? Your home? Your health? If we were all people living in the Bible, God would suddenly speak to us in a booming voice and give us tenfold what we had. Since we DON'T live in the Bible, people have lost all ties with their families, are out on the street, hungry, possibly dying. You can read story after story of people giving Christ their all and receiving suffering and death in return. According to your belief, only GOD knows the hearts and minds of his children. YOU are not the one who can judge.

 

An intellectual discussion or debate between Christians and Ex-Christians is one thing, but YOU are only throwing around bold assumptions and accusations. I don't think it is because you are trying to be a douche bag. I think you genuinely do not understand that you are being hurtful. You believe that Christianity is common sense because that is the information you've been fed. Of course that is just a rough guess. I'm not saying that's how you really are. Because then I would be assuming I know your thought processes, life experiences and know everything about every relationship you ever had. I don't know any of that.

 

Please try to be more courteous and understand that no matter how "obvious" your truth is for you, to most of us, religion as a whole embodies every lie and empty promise we have ever experienced.

[stryper]

 

That's what I mean by you people being faced with evidence and simply rejecting it out of hand. You start with a premise of unbelief and all you will do when faced with evidence for faith is to reject that evidence however you can.

 

btw, the Bible is a book of history, it is actually 66 books written by 40 different authors over a period of 2,000 years. What one author prophesied was fulfilled in a historical book written by a different author. So it is not circular reasoning.

 

How about Israel becoming a nation again? That was prophesied in Isaiah 66:7-10. This was not fulfiled in the history of the Bible, but in modern day history.

 

 

I am well aware of the nature of the bible. I had one in my hand from at least 3rd till college.

 

now. as to Isaish.

 

According to a 2sec search on the internet about this book.

 

1)It is generally considered to not have been written all at once.

2) the section that you refer too is called the Trito-Isaiah that was

the work of anonymous diciples committed to continuing Isaiah's work in the year immeadately after the return from Babylon

 

3) The Israelites had just been allowed to return to Judah after about a 50 year exile. So.....

4) They were ACTUALLY heading back to Judah to begin rebuilding the nation of Judah and eventually the Second Temple. Therefore.....

5) All the birthing imagery is logically reflective of the times the people were living in. They quite literally were rebuilding their nation and the passages reflect that hope.

 

It has nothing to do with 1948. Besides Jerusalem has been rebuilt and destroyed multiple times over the centuries, as many ancient cities in that area have been.

 

Thus it wasn't a prophecy.

[mymistake]

That's what I mean by you people being faced with evidence and simply rejecting it out of hand.

 

What evidence? I've seen some wild, unsupported claims made by Christians. That isn't evidence.

 

You start with a premise of unbelief and all you will do when faced with evidence for faith is to reject that evidence however you can.

 

I started with the premise that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. It was through the evidence that I became an ex-Christian. What evidence are you talking about - your unsupported claims?

 

btw, the Bible is a book of history, it is actually 66 books written by 40 different authors over a period of 2,000 years.

 

Well if you include the Epic of Gilgamesh as a Bible source then okay. Of those authors only one (Saul of Tarsus) is known. We can make educated guesses about a few others (Ezra). Most of the Bible authors were anonymous men. A few of them outright lied about who they were. And when it comes to editors there were at least hundreds who intentionally altered the Bible and thousands of scribes who accidently altered it from errors.

 

While the Bible does contain some history it also at times paints a false picture. That is to say it includes a lot of propaganda. Probably more propaganda than history.

 

What one author prophesied was fulfilled in a historical book written by a different author. So it is not circular reasoning.

 

Yes it is.

 

How about Israel becoming a nation again? That was prophesied in Isaiah 66:7-10. This was not fulfiled in the history of the Bible, but in modern day history.

 

Praise the United Nations! Maybe the UN is God? A nation forming and calling itself "Israel" and some ancient text is a coincidence. The modern nation has very little to do with the late Bronze Age kingdom destroyed by Babylon.

[skepticalme]

That's what I mean by you people being faced with evidence and simply rejecting it out of hand. You start with a premise of unbelief and all you will do when faced with evidence for faith is to reject that evidence however you can.

 

Pot meet Kettle. Isn't ironic that you are trying to make our position sound more like your own, then presenting it as a strawman. If you think this is faulty reasoning then why are you using it? You are starting with the premise of belief and rejecting everything we say. As many have pointed out, the name of this site is EX-CHRISTIAN. We all started out as christians so we didn't start with the premise of unbelief, we started out as believers. We left because of the evidence. My life is a testiment to the fact that I AM willing to change my world view when presented with evidence and view it objectively. I am here because I can think for myself and because I was able to overcome the propaganda I was feed and once believed. All I've seen you do is repeat scripture. You tell others to believe what you were told to believe and nobody thinks for themselves like good little sheep and sheep will follow each other right into the slaughter house. And christians are proud of this, they think its a virtue.

 

btw, the Bible is a book of history, it is actually 66 books written by 40 different authors over a period of 2,000 years. What one author prophesied was fulfilled in a historical book written by a different author. So it is not circular reasoning.

 

And do you have any proof that any of them actually came true? Somebody saying so them writing it down doesn't make it true.

 

 

How about Israel becoming a nation again? That was prophesied in Isaiah 66:7-10. This was not fulfiled in the history of the Bible, but in modern day history.

 

And you don't think that the fact that is in the bible has anything to do with it? Those people believe that they are entitled to there own nation BECAUSE its in the bible. So they fought for it and won. The problem is that there is another group of people who think they are entitled to a nation on the same land because it is in their bible as well. They are still fighting and may one day win.

[Vigile]

You not believing doesn't make hell not a real place,

 

You believing it's real doesn't make it a real place either.

 

And yes, you did reject something. You rejected reality.

 

 

 

iro·ny

noun \ˈī-rə-nē also ˈī(-ə)r-nē\

plural iro·nies

 

 

Definition of IRONY

 

 

 

1

: a pretense of ignorance and of willingness to learn from another assumed in order to make the other's false conceptions conspicuous by adroit questioning —called also Socratic irony

 

2

a : the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning b : a usually humorous or sardonic literary style or form characterized by irony c : an ironic expression or utterance

 

3

a (1) : Believer

[Vigile]

And then you people have the gall to say that I should have had more "stamina" in the beginning when I wanted to just quit! All you people ever do is insult us without any qualm of conscience and you think you are superior because we stoop to your level and offer some of the same in return!

 

"Do not answer a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes." Proverbs 26:4-5

 

See definition of irony above.

[Vigile]

 

Fuck Jesus and his blood. There your have it. I'm most definitely will go to Hell!

 

Jesus' spooge is more powerful anyway. What's more life-giving than spooge?

[Vigile]

You know what. If there where a loving god, and he was so damned concerned about us knowing who he is, what he expects of us, etc., we wouldn't have to jump through philosophical hoops to know of his existence. He'd leave NO DOUBT.

 

If jesus really loved us, he would have allowed us all to be born retarded so that we wouldn't be trapped by reason and understanding.

[Vigile]

but I have seen miracles that were indisputable.

 

I know, your gas needle was on E and yet god helped you drive the 17.6 miles to the next gas station.

 

Wonder why he didn't use his awesome power here though:

 

[Vigile]

You're an ass! Or better yet, you're a horse's tail! Answer a fool according to his folly...

Spoken like a True Christian™. You could learn a bit or two from Thumbelina or End3.

 

Your days on this website are numbered...

 

If my days are numbered, then so should the days be numbered of the person that I responded to. Or is there a doublke standard here? Unbelievers are allowed to curse and swear and insult people, but believers don't have the same right? You hypocrites!

 

15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

 

Again, definition of irony above.

[Vigile]

People of Jesus' day believed in the resurrection because it was an indisputable fact.

 

People of Mohammed's day believed in Mohammed's religion because they were put to the sword and told to believe or die!

 

Crack a book once in a while. Since I doubt you will, here's an easy-to-understand video:

 

http://www.1channel.ch/watch-2727677-National-Geographic-When-Rome-Ruled-Rise-of-Christianity