Hi My Name Is Aaron And Im A Christian How Are You Today/nite/morning/afternoon?

[Destinyjesus3000]

wow its starting to get sticky in here, 85% done, im looking foraward to getting back into this thing, by the way instead of a quote this time i i have a genuine question, why didnt Mel Gibson put "Based ona true story" for passion of the christ? is it against the law? church and state?

[Guest end3]

Why?

 

Because we lack the knowledge and wisdom of how to utilize it.

 

That is always the way it has been. We discover something. Then we develop the knowledge and wisdom of how to utilize it afterwards. The human mind is not able to figure out how to use something we have not discovered. So we invent the car. Then we take decades to figure out how best to use it and how to make it safer. It's a process that continues even today. We invented the plane. Then we found ways to make it useful. Then we found ways to make it safer. It just keeps going.

 

The implications are vastly different, do you expect?

[Guest end3]

HI IM GOD, I NEVER CHANGE

 

BUT I WRITE A BOOK THAT WILL BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND A FEW YEARS AFTER I WRITE IT

 

OH, I ALSO CHANGE HOW I DO THINGS BASED ON THE CULTURE OF PEOPLE I AM CURRENTLY FUCKING WITH

 

HI IM GOD, I NEVER CHANGE

 

I think it's ok for us to call each other names in the Lion's Den Noggy. We can pick up where we left off 30 days ago?

Let's not.

 

It was a lighthearted poke at Noggy.

[Antlerman]

wow its starting to get sticky in here, 85% done, im looking foraward to getting back into this thing, by the way instead of a quote this time i i have a genuine question, why didnt Mel Gibson put "Based ona true story" for passion of the christ? is it against the law? church and state?

I think it was the whole "truth in adverting" laws they have on the books. Remember how Jason and the Argonauts got that whole lawsuit because they claimed it was based on a true story?

[♦ ficino ♦]

 

Edit: Rat sodomy? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

I find this highly offensive for many reasons.

[Akheia]

End, you really don't get it. Please. Sit back, clear your head a moment of the god-bothering crap you keep parroting, and listen:

 

* Your religion makes historical claims that are completely nullified by all archaeological evidence.

* Your religion makes claims to being the sole arbiter of all truth, but these truths are seen by unbelievers as being purely subjective and/or completely abhorrent morally ("hardening hearts," original sin, etc).

* Your religion claims that its god has qualities that can be shown logical to be incompatible and mutually inconsistent.

* Your religion's major tenets (Crucifixion, Garden of Eden, etc) never even happened, making their "moral" components completely baseless.

* Your religion claims that it is superior because it has warm fuzzies, but every single religion has adherents feeling warm fuzzies identical to those found in Christianity.

* Your "holy book" was categorically not written by any god and despite your naive feelings otherwise, is certainly something ordinary men could have written, given a few hundred years and a solid desire to emulate existing myths and heroes' stories.

* Your "savior" was not even a real person but a made-up conglomerate of a dozen different Jewish wizards in Judea at the time.

 

In order for your religion to be superior to all others, it must have something more to it than just your assertions and convoluted arguments. You're making what is known in the biz as "extraordinary claims." That means you must have extraordinary evidence. Apologetics and convoluted arguments and your baseless, proof-less assertions are no more valid to me than those found in any other religion. Do you understand why I'm seeing your religion and other religions as identical? There is a reason for that. NO religion has proof. So in absence of solid proof that there's even life after death, that there's even *a* deity, much less the one you're claiming, I'll go with a religion that is not bloodthirsty and misogynistic, thank you, or none at all.

 

I feel like you didn't even read that novel I wrote. My fault, perhaps. I get wordy on pain meds. But your assertions are still baseless and without proof; you're arguing a lot and wasting a lot of hot air, but you still have no proof that what you're saying is true. if I'm going to bet my soul on something, I'm going to bet that whatever's after this life will be way more upset with me following the hate-filled, bigoted, violence-condoning, threatening God of the Bible than going my own way.

[Guest end3]

End, you really don't get it. Please. Sit back, clear your head a moment of the god-bothering crap you keep parroting, and listen:

 

* Your religion makes historical claims that are completely nullified by all archaeological evidence.

* Your religion makes claims to being the sole arbiter of all truth, but these truths are seen by unbelievers as being purely subjective and/or completely abhorrent morally ("hardening hearts," original sin, etc).

* Your religion claims that its god has qualities that can be shown logical to be incompatible and mutually inconsistent.

* Your religion's major tenets (Crucifixion, Garden of Eden, etc) never even happened, making their "moral" components completely baseless.

* Your religion claims that it is superior because it has warm fuzzies, but every single religion has adherents feeling warm fuzzies identical to those found in Christianity.

* Your "holy book" was categorically not written by any god and despite your naive feelings otherwise, is certainly something ordinary men could have written, given a few hundred years and a solid desire to emulate existing myths and heroes' stories.

* Your "savior" was not even a real person but a made-up conglomerate of a dozen different Jewish wizards in Judea at the time.

 

In order for your religion to be superior to all others, it must have something more to it than just your assertions and convoluted arguments. You're making what is known in the biz as "extraordinary claims." That means you must have extraordinary evidence. Apologetics and convoluted arguments and your baseless, proof-less assertions are no more valid to me than those found in any other religion. Do you understand why I'm seeing your religion and other religions as identical? There is a reason for that. NO religion has proof. So in absence of solid proof that there's even life after death, that there's even *a* deity, much less the one you're claiming, I'll go with a religion that is not bloodthirsty and misogynistic, thank you, or none at all.

 

I feel like you didn't even read that novel I wrote. My fault, perhaps. I get wordy on pain meds. But your assertions are still baseless and without proof; you're arguing a lot and wasting a lot of hot air, but you still have no proof that what you're saying is true. if I'm going to bet my soul on something, I'm going to bet that whatever's after this life will be way more upset with me following the hate-filled, bigoted, violence-condoning, threatening God of the Bible than going my own way.

 

Firstly, I haven't yet responded to you lengthy post. As I stated, I am looking forward to it that you might understand my reasons for believing. It's not that I don't hear you. So if you will bear with me till I get time.

 

But for time being, these type statements are what bother me:

 

All archeological evidence. How about all existing archeological evidence? Big BIG difference.

 

Please, I will get it written. I haven't yet, because it takes more time than these other posts....the indepthness of what I perceive you asking for.

[Guest end3]

Edit: Rat sodomy? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

I find this highly offensive for many reasons.

 

My apologies, it was bad humor, yet relevant.

[Akheia]

Poor guy. I just wonder if you actually understand what "archeological evidence" even means. You're squirming out of definitions again and it's showing. Let's say it this way:

 

There is no evidence for there having been a Garden of Eden, a big flood, a Tower of Babel (the specific Tower that caused human language to be confounded by a jealous, possessive, controlling deity), a period of wandering in the desert for 40 years (which nullifies the entire Ten Commandments myth), a Nazareth, a worldwide census occurring at the time the Bible claims, the specific character Jesus who specifically existed and died for human sins--or for that matter for almost all of the dramatis personae detailed in the Bible, from Adam to John; for any miracle whatsoever in the BIble, for the resurrection, for the events around the resurrection such as the zombie uprising in Jerusalem, or for the entire New Testament being written by who it's claimed to be written by. Not only is there a lack of evidence, there is a wealth of evidence utterly disproving the entire idea in most of these cases. The only real way you can argue out of these simple facts is to try to fudge just what "archaeological evidence" even means, and I won't let you do that because I'm an educated human being who actually does know her shit in this department. Scary, isn't it?

 

We're not even talking here about the Bible's promises of miracles--promises that are completely unproven and unsupported by evidence and real life. We're just talking about the foundation document itself. Really the only real wiggle room you have is to claim the entire faith's tenets are subjective and metaphorical, but there you fall down because the faith in general is morally abhorrent so as a metaphorical faith it is still inferior to other faiths that lack its brutality. I hate to say this, but you don't have a lot of room here. My real questions for you:

 

Why do you, as a believer, put faith in a system that makes such claims but has no evidence supporting any of its tenets? It's got to be scary as hell to realize that your faith is possibly misplaced, but why do you, End, keep making excuses for this disgusting, hate-filled deity of yours?

 

And I'm curious about this: Since you've admitted that you understand that at least some of it's mythological, how do you figure out what's myth and what's real? What is left, of this poor, sad, shredded Bible I just handed you, that IS real and verifiable and not just subjective feelings and "being super duper sure"? What if you're wrong and whatever's out there really thinks the Bible is morally repugnant? More importantly, after all you've read here, how can you even stand there and tell us that the Bible's God is anything but a supremely brutal, bloodthirsty tyrant?

[♦ ficino ♦]

Edit: Rat sodomy? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

I find this highly offensive for many reasons.

 

My apologies, it was bad humor, yet relevant.

 

Apologies accepted. Please consider that jokes about sodomy are, to me at least, like making jokes about lynching. Until very recently, gay people in the US could be convicted for the so-called crime of sodomy - which in many states was defined even more broadly than a literal construal of that term. The expression "faggot" has historical roots in a time when people could be burned at the stake for "sodomy." In some countries, it is still a capital crime for gay people to express love physically, and they are countries where the prejudices against gays and lesbians are created and reinforced by religion (Saudi Arabia and Iran, to name two - it's being introduced once again in Uganda at the urging of fundamentalist Christians). Your bible directly promotes an ideology of oppression and possibly killing against me personally as well as millions of others (and more broadly, civil rights for some are to the good for human rights for everyone).

[Akheia]

BTW:

 

How about all existing archeological evidence?

This is beneath you and I'm not even going to entertain it. You're displaying your utter ignorance of archaeology and of the scientific method. I also second the suggestion that you bone up on your science education, because you really have no clue what would be involved in completely revising the evidence against the 40-year wandering or the Great Flood. If you want to quibble that maybe, in some far-flung world in the far-distant future, someone might, possibly, maybe, somehow prove that the Bible's not just a book of mythology, then fine, but you're living in a never-never land of your own devising there. A hurt, whiny little "Well, it might just be true, you never know" is pretty fucking weak to base one's entire life and possible eternal soul upon. There might also be unicorns and leprechauns, and there might also be Zeus and Hera, and there might also be Flying Spaghetti Monsters. We just haven't found proof yet.

 

Any other complete misdirections and logical fallacies you want to try out before you plunge into the questions I had?

[Guest end3]

Poor guy. I just wonder if you actually understand what "archeological evidence" even means. You're squirming out of definitions again and it's showing. Let's say it this way:

 

There is no evidence for there having been a Garden of Eden, a big flood, a Tower of Babel (the specific Tower that caused human language to be confounded by a jealous, possessive, controlling deity), a period of wandering in the desert for 40 years (which nullifies the entire Ten Commandments myth), a Nazareth, a worldwide census occurring at the time the Bible claims, the specific character Jesus who specifically existed and died for human sins--or for that matter for almost all of the dramatis personae detailed in the Bible, from Adam to John; for any miracle whatsoever in the BIble, for the resurrection, for the events around the resurrection such as the zombie uprising in Jerusalem, or for the entire New Testament being written by who it's claimed to be written by. Not only is there a lack of evidence, there is a wealth of evidence utterly disproving the entire idea in most of these cases. The only real way you can argue out of these simple facts is to try to fudge just what "archaeological evidence" even means, and I won't let you do that because I'm an educated human being who actually does know her shit in this department. Scary, isn't it?

 

We're not even talking here about the Bible's promises of miracles--promises that are completely unproven and unsupported by evidence and real life. We're just talking about the foundation document itself. Really the only real wiggle room you have is to claim the entire faith's tenets are subjective and metaphorical, but there you fall down because the faith in general is morally abhorrent so as a metaphorical faith it is still inferior to other faiths that lack its brutality. I hate to say this, but you don't have a lot of room here. My real questions for you:

 

Why do you, as a believer, put faith in a system that makes such claims but has no evidence supporting any of its tenets? It's got to be scary as hell to realize that your faith is possibly misplaced, but why do you, End, keep making excuses for this disgusting, hate-filled deity of yours?

 

And I'm curious about this: Since you've admitted that you understand that at least some of it's mythological, how do you figure out what's myth and what's real? What is left, of this poor, sad, shredded Bible I just handed you, that IS real and verifiable and not just subjective feelings and "being super duper sure"? What if you're wrong and whatever's out there really thinks the Bible is morally repugnant? More importantly, after all you've read here, how can you even stand there and tell us that the Bible's God is anything but a supremely brutal, bloodthirsty tyrant?

 

Ma'am, I am attempting to be respectful towards you.....real dialogue. Trust me, I have heard your obsession with your reasoning 14 times now.... thx. Like I said, I shall compose a post especially for thou.

[Guest end3]

BTW:

 

How about all existing archeological evidence?

This is beneath you and I'm not even going to entertain it. You're displaying your utter ignorance of archaeology and of the scientific method. I also second the suggestion that you bone up on your science education, because you really have no clue what would be involved in completely revising the evidence against the 40-year wandering or the Great Flood. If you want to quibble that maybe, in some far-flung world in the far-distant future, someone might, possibly, maybe, somehow prove that the Bible's not just a book of mythology, then fine, but you're living in a never-never land of your own devising there. A hurt, whiny little "Well, it might just be true, you never know" is pretty fucking weak to base one's entire life and possible eternal soul upon. There might also be unicorns and leprechauns, and there might also be Zeus and Hera, and there might also be Flying Spaghetti Monsters. We just haven't found proof yet.

 

Any other complete misdirections and logical fallacies you want to try out before you plunge into the questions I had?

 

What, they don't dig up new crap every day? Really? And SPECULATE about the evidence??? Jesus lady.

[Guest end3]

Edit: Rat sodomy? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

I find this highly offensive for many reasons.

 

My apologies, it was bad humor, yet relevant.

 

Apologies accepted. Please consider that jokes about sodomy are, to me at least, like making jokes about lynching. Until very recently, gay people in the US could be convicted for the so-called crime of sodomy - which in many states was defined even more broadly than a literal construal of that term. The expression "faggot" has historical roots in a time when people could be burned at the stake for "sodomy." In some countries, it is still a capital crime for gay people to express love physically, and they are countries where the prejudices against gays and lesbians are created and reinforced by religion (Saudi Arabia and Iran, to name two - it's being introduced once again in Uganda at the urging of fundamentalist Christians). Your bible directly promotes an ideology of oppression and possibly killing against me personally as well as millions of others (and more broadly, civil rights for some are to the good for human rights for everyone).

 

Yeah, that's the redneck in me. I have incomplete ideas on the aforementioned subject, but that's another discussion. I apreciate your demeanor in discussion. I shall attempt to do better.

[mymistake]

But for time being, these type statements are what bother me: All archeological evidence. How about all existing archeological evidence? Big BIG difference.

 

Sorry but there isn't. When somebody says "all archeological evidence" they are not including evidence that does not exist. All archeological evidence means all existing archeological evidence. No difference.

[mymistake]

Why?

Because we lack the knowledge and wisdom of how to utilize it.

That is always the way it has been. We discover something. Then we develop the knowledge and wisdom of how to utilize it afterwards. The human mind is not able to figure out how to use something we have not discovered. So we invent the car. Then we take decades to figure out how best to use it and how to make it safer. It's a process that continues even today. We invented the plane. Then we found ways to make it useful. Then we found ways to make it safer. It just keeps going.

The implications are vastly different, do you expect?

 

We have made discoveries and invented things with big implications. I was pulling examples to demonstrate that the pattern is the same everywhere. The human mind cannot anticipate the how regarding things we have not yet discovered.

 

If you want an example with big implications try nukes. In the 40's some people thought that a nuke was a great way to flatten a city. Then in the 50's people tested nukes using their own troops. Have you seen those old films where we would send sailors into nuked ships or troops into a nuked area? Then at some point we figured out that testing nukes in the air is bad for us. (really?) So we started testing them underground. Then we discovered that even testing them underground is bad for us. Nobody has used a nuke in anger in over 65 years. We discover something, then we invent, then we learn, then we understand.

[Thought2Much]

What, they don't dig up new crap every day? Really? And SPECULATE about the evidence??? Jesus lady.

 

Do you not understand that you just had your ass handed to you by Akheia? Or are you just in denial?

[Guest end3]

What, they don't dig up new crap every day? Really? And SPECULATE about the evidence??? Jesus lady.

 

Do you not understand that you just had your ass handed to you by Akheia? Or are you just in denial?

 

That's ok Trapped, she can be sure until she's blue in the face if it helps her. Her husband, if she has one, most likely says yes dear, yes dear, whatever you say dear with a trembling gun stuck in his mouth contemplating a better alternative.

[Ouroboros]

That's ok Trapped, she can be sure until she's blue in the face if it helps her. Her husband, if she has one, most likely says yes dear, yes dear, whatever you say dear with a trembling gun stuck in his mouth contemplating a better alternative.

Eh... You're starting to get into shaky territory there. Hold it back a bit, will ya'? One more misstep and I'll send you packing for good. Comprende?

[Thought2Much]

What, they don't dig up new crap every day? Really? And SPECULATE about the evidence??? Jesus lady.

 

Do you not understand that you just had your ass handed to you by Akheia? Or are you just in denial?

 

That's ok Trapped, she can be sure until she's blue in the face if it helps her. Her husband, if she has one, most likely says yes dear, yes dear, whatever you say dear with a trembling gun stuck in his mouth contemplating a better alternative.

 

Son, if this were a boxing match, they would have stopped it early while your head was still attached to your body. You have posted absolutely nothing that refutes even one of the points that she made. Not. Even. One.

 

(EDIT: Sorry, posted this while Ouroboros was posting. If you want, I will delete this post.)

 

(EDIT to EDIT: Whoops, I see Ouroboros said "Hold it back a bit, will ya?" and not "Hold it back a bit, will y'all?" Totally different.)

[Antlerman]

That's ok Trapped, she can be sure until she's blue in the face if it helps her. Her husband, if she has one, most likely says yes dear, yes dear, whatever you say dear with a trembling gun stuck in his mouth contemplating a better alternative.

 

Eh... You're starting to get into shaky territory there. Hold it back a bit, will ya'? One more misstep and I'll send you packing for good. Comprende?

 

Yeah, no shit. End take it back a few thousand times.

[Guest end3]

That's ok Trapped, she can be sure until she's blue in the face if it helps her. Her husband, if she has one, most likely says yes dear, yes dear, whatever you say dear with a trembling gun stuck in his mouth contemplating a better alternative.

 

Eh... You're starting to get into shaky territory there. Hold it back a bit, will ya'? One more misstep and I'll send you packing for good. Comprende?

 

Yeah, no shit. End take it back a few thousand times.

 

That's ok Trapped, she can be sure until she's blue in the face if it helps her. Her husband, if she has one, most likely says yes dear, yes dear, whatever you say dear with a trembling gun stuck in his mouth contemplating a better alternative.

 

Eh... You're starting to get into shaky territory there. Hold it back a bit, will ya'? One more misstep and I'll send you packing for good. Comprende?

 

 

Sure.

 

Can she not read? I've told her that I would compose an answer in the near future, yet she persists in spewing the same message without me writing a response? Really???

[Guest end3]

 

(EDIT to EDIT: Whoops, I see Ouroboros said "Hold it back a bit, will ya?" and not "Hold it back a bit, will y'all?" Totally different.)

 

Yes, and what would be wrong with that? That a person become like the other so that there is a relationship? Same arrogance.

[mymistake]

That was wrong. Let that be a lesson to everyone. This is what happens when a Christian can't defend their faith. This is why I recommend that people never debate a Christian in person.

[Thackerie]

That's ok Trapped, she can be sure until she's blue in the face if it helps her. Her husband, if she has one, most likely says yes dear, yes dear, whatever you say dear with a trembling gun stuck in his mouth contemplating a better alternative.

 

Eh... You're starting to get into shaky territory there. Hold it back a bit, will ya'? One more misstep and I'll send you packing for good. Comprende?

 

 

+1000

 

Awful damn rude of him to hijack this thread, too.