Jump to content

Everyone's Responsibility To Each Other


Roz
 Share

Recommended Posts

You're right christians, it DOES matter what you believe

(ps:  if anyone dares to invoke a feminism debate here, so help me I will summon the wrath of our holy beloved spaghetti monster to punt you into the OT forum)

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday I watched and listened to Mr. Eberhard's presentation. 

As the loyal opposition here, here is a rebuttal of Eberhard's

"Why the Arguments for God Fail" 

 

"First and foremost, I’d like to take a moment and express my appreciation for J.T., the passion he displays in doing his activist work for atheism, and his strong desire for public discourse on serious issues surrounding the most important question mankind has ever asked: Does God exist? While we certainly disagree on the answer to this question, we stand on common ground in desiring to share our beliefs with others and in encouraging those with whom we agree to equip themselves to evangelize more effectively. J.T. insists that we should “tell people what you think…” in order to “…help them to be better, reasonable people” (6:05). On this, I could not agree more. Speaking to his audience, he says, “We need to be holding them to the reasons they believe these things” (6:24). This, too, is an area of agreement. So, is J.T. in fact reasonable, consistent, and, most importantly, correct? I don’t think so."

 

~themanonmars

 

http://themanonmars.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/j-t-s-underwhelming-critique-of-christianity-part-one/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday I watched and listened to Mr. Eberhard's presentation.

As the loyal opposition here, here is a rebuttal of Eberhard's

"Why the Arguments for God Fail"

 

"First and foremost, I’d like to take a moment and express my appreciation for J.T., the passion he displays in doing his activist work for atheism, and his strong desire for public discourse on serious issues surrounding the most important question mankind has ever asked: Does God exist? While we certainly disagree on the answer to this question, we stand on common ground in desiring to share our beliefs with others and in encouraging those with whom we agree to equip themselves to evangelize more effectively. J.T. insists that we should “tell people what you think…” in order to “…help them to be better, reasonable people” (6:05). On this, I could not agree more. Speaking to his audience, he says, “We need to be holding them to the reasons they believe these things” (6:24). This, too, is an area of agreement. So, is J.T. in fact reasonable, consistent, and, most importantly, correct? I don’t think so."

 

~themanonmars

 

http://themanonmars.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/j-t-s-underwhelming-critique-of-christianity-part-one/

Ironhorse we don't need to know if there is a god, because we have found him in this very room. Do you know who it is?

 

It's you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ninurta

How did I ever manage to create that shitstorm that was the feminism debates? Makes me proud. Are you for or against feminism?

 

That being said, I'm in agreeance here, everyone's got a responsibility to their brothers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The spaghetti monster sentences you to watch ray comfort's videos for no less than 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It amazes me that if there is a god or room for a god that it is the Christian god. For instance, a Christian might say "I don't know why...but God did it". How do you know your holy book adequately describes this "god". just seems rather smug to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday I watched and listened to Mr. Eberhard's presentation. 

As the loyal opposition here, here is a rebuttal of Eberhard's

"Why the Arguments for God Fail" 

 

"First and foremost, I’d like to take a moment and express my appreciation for J.T., the passion he displays in doing his activist work for atheism, and his strong desire for public discourse on serious issues surrounding the most important question mankind has ever asked: Does God exist? While we certainly disagree on the answer to this question, we stand on common ground in desiring to share our beliefs with others and in encouraging those with whom we agree to equip themselves to evangelize more effectively. J.T. insists that we should “tell people what you think…” in order to “…help them to be better, reasonable people” (6:05). On this, I could not agree more. Speaking to his audience, he says, “We need to be holding them to the reasons they believe these things” (6:24). This, too, is an area of agreement. So, is J.T. in fact reasonable, consistent, and, most importantly, correct? I don’t think so."

 

~themanonmars

 

http://themanonmars.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/j-t-s-underwhelming-critique-of-christianity-part-one/

 

 

What a nice paragraph of totally meaninless sentences. None of this is useful, basically he insults him complements him and says he is wrong, wow thanks for the opinion to his opinion. Talk is cheap have god show his face and this won't be an issue anymore.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yesterday I watched and listened to Mr. Eberhard's presentation. 

As the loyal opposition here, here is a rebuttal of Eberhard's

"Why the Arguments for God Fail" 

 

"First and foremost, I’d like to take a moment and express my appreciation for J.T., the passion he displays in doing his activist work for atheism, and his strong desire for public discourse on serious issues surrounding the most important question mankind has ever asked: Does God exist? While we certainly disagree on the answer to this question, we stand on common ground in desiring to share our beliefs with others and in encouraging those with whom we agree to equip themselves to evangelize more effectively. J.T. insists that we should “tell people what you think…” in order to “…help them to be better, reasonable people” (6:05). On this, I could not agree more. Speaking to his audience, he says, “We need to be holding them to the reasons they believe these things” (6:24). This, too, is an area of agreement. So, is J.T. in fact reasonable, consistent, and, most importantly, correct? I don’t think so."

 

~themanonmars

 

http://themanonmars.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/j-t-s-underwhelming-critique-of-christianity-part-one/

 

 

What a nice paragraph of totally meaninless sentences. None of this is useful, basically he insults him complements him and says he is wrong, wow thanks for the opinion to his opinion. Talk is cheap have god show his face and this won't be an issue anymore.

 

 

It's funny how manonmars mentions "evidence of God's existence", but cites none...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yesterday I watched and listened to Mr. Eberhard's presentation. 

As the loyal opposition here, here is a rebuttal of Eberhard's

"Why the Arguments for God Fail" 

 

"First and foremost, I’d like to take a moment and express my appreciation for J.T., the passion he displays in doing his activist work for atheism, and his strong desire for public discourse on serious issues surrounding the most important question mankind has ever asked: Does God exist? While we certainly disagree on the answer to this question, we stand on common ground in desiring to share our beliefs with others and in encouraging those with whom we agree to equip themselves to evangelize more effectively. J.T. insists that we should “tell people what you think…” in order to “…help them to be better, reasonable people” (6:05). On this, I could not agree more. Speaking to his audience, he says, “We need to be holding them to the reasons they believe these things” (6:24). This, too, is an area of agreement. So, is J.T. in fact reasonable, consistent, and, most importantly, correct? I don’t think so."

 

~themanonmars

 

http://themanonmars.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/j-t-s-underwhelming-critique-of-christianity-part-one/

 

 

What a nice paragraph of totally meaninless sentences. None of this is useful, basically he insults him complements him and says he is wrong, wow thanks for the opinion to his opinion. Talk is cheap have god show his face and this won't be an issue anymore.

 

 

Waiting for God to show his face....waiting....waiting....zzzzzzzzzz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday I watched and listened to Mr. Eberhard's presentation. 

As the loyal opposition here, here is a rebuttal of Eberhard's

"Why the Arguments for God Fail" 

 

"First and foremost, I’d like to take a moment and express my appreciation for J.T., the passion he displays in doing his activist work for atheism, and his strong desire for public discourse on serious issues surrounding the most important question mankind has ever asked: Does God exist? While we certainly disagree on the answer to this question, we stand on common ground in desiring to share our beliefs with others and in encouraging those with whom we agree to equip themselves to evangelize more effectively. J.T. insists that we should “tell people what you think…” in order to “…help them to be better, reasonable people” (6:05). On this, I could not agree more. Speaking to his audience, he says, “We need to be holding them to the reasons they believe these things” (6:24). This, too, is an area of agreement. So, is J.T. in fact reasonable, consistent, and, most importantly, correct? I don’t think so."

 

~themanonmars

 

http://themanonmars.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/j-t-s-underwhelming-critique-of-christianity-part-one/

 

themanonmars - another piss ant blogger. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ayn Rand told me I was an island, now this guy comes along and says I'm my brother's keeper. What to do, what to do, what ta do?

 

and what do ya know? Feminism didn't derail this thread, Christian gyberish did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ninurta

The spaghetti monster sentences you to watch ray comfort's videos for no less than 10 years.

Does he talk about feminism?

 

Ayn Rand told me I was an island, now this guy comes along and says I'm my brother's keeper. What to do, what to do, what ta do?

 

and what do ya know? Feminism didn't derail this thread, Christian gyberish did.

Feminism can't derail this thread. Since it was in the OP, its part of the initial discussion. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting video, thanks for sharing.

 

And why feminism? Is that a new kind of atheism (ok, trying to be funnyeh...).

 

And Duderonomy, you should go ask the farmer :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the feminism thing was an unnecessary commit by me, there was a thread in the OT subforum with a video that included how the phrase 'man up' was sexist.  I shouldn't have put it here, that was another thing altogether heh.  I only included it because near the end of the clip JT laughed at the 'man up' comment made to fight himself tearing up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Yesterday I watched and listened to Mr. Eberhard's presentation. 

As the loyal opposition here, here is a rebuttal of Eberhard's

"Why the Arguments for God Fail" 

 

"First and foremost, I’d like to take a moment and express my appreciation for J.T., the passion he displays in doing his activist work for atheism, and his strong desire for public discourse on serious issues surrounding the most important question mankind has ever asked: Does God exist? While we certainly disagree on the answer to this question, we stand on common ground in desiring to share our beliefs with others and in encouraging those with whom we agree to equip themselves to evangelize more effectively. J.T. insists that we should “tell people what you think…” in order to “…help them to be better, reasonable people” (6:05). On this, I could not agree more. Speaking to his audience, he says, “We need to be holding them to the reasons they believe these things” (6:24). This, too, is an area of agreement. So, is J.T. in fact reasonable, consistent, and, most importantly, correct? I don’t think so."

 

~themanonmars

 

http://themanonmars.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/j-t-s-underwhelming-critique-of-christianity-part-one/

 

 

What a nice paragraph of totally meaninless sentences. None of this is useful, basically he insults him complements him and says he is wrong, wow thanks for the opinion to his opinion. Talk is cheap have god show his face and this won't be an issue anymore.

 

 

It's funny how manonmars mentions "evidence of God's existence", but cites none...

 

 

Manonmars does give several reasons to think God exists.

 

From Part Two:

 

One of J.T.’s more self-incriminating refutations centers on the argument from Christians regarding the apparent design of the world. To this argument, J.T. asks rhetorically, “And does the universe look designed?”, to which he answers by saying, “Well, no. The universe creates order all by itself which is exactly the universe we would expect to find ourselves in if there was no God” (15:23). Quite humorously, even the aforementioned atheist Richard Dawkins sees the obvious appearance of design in nature. On page one of his book, The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins writes, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Manonmars does give several reasons to think God exists.

 

From Part Two:

 

One of J.T.’s more self-incriminating refutations centers on the argument from Christians regarding the apparent design of the world. To this argument, J.T. asks rhetorically, “And does the universe look designed?”, to which he answers by saying, “Well, no. The universe creates order all by itself which is exactly the universe we would expect to find ourselves in if there was no God” (15:23). Quite humorously, even the aforementioned atheist Richard Dawkins sees the obvious appearance of design in nature. On page one of his book, The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins writes, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."

 

 

Appearance of design is not design.

 

Try harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Manonmars does give several reasons to think God exists.

 

From Part Two:

 

One of J.T.’s more self-incriminating refutations centers on the argument from Christians regarding the apparent design of the world. To this argument, J.T. asks rhetorically, “And does the universe look designed?”, to which he answers by saying, “Well, no. The universe creates order all by itself which is exactly the universe we would expect to find ourselves in if there was no God” (15:23). Quite humorously, even the aforementioned atheist Richard Dawkins sees the obvious appearance of design in nature. On page one of his book, The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins writes, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."

 

 

Appearance of design is not design.

 

Try harder.

 

 

 

You say appearance of design is not design.

I believe appearance of design points to a designer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Manonmars does give several reasons to think God exists.

 

From Part Two:

 

One of J.T.’s more self-incriminating refutations centers on the argument from Christians regarding the apparent design of the world. To this argument, J.T. asks rhetorically, “And does the universe look designed?”, to which he answers by saying, “Well, no. The universe creates order all by itself which is exactly the universe we would expect to find ourselves in if there was no God” (15:23). Quite humorously, even the aforementioned atheist Richard Dawkins sees the obvious appearance of design in nature. On page one of his book, The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins writes, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."

 

 

Appearance of design is not design.

 

Try harder.

 

 

 

You say appearance of design is not design.

I believe appearance of design points to a designer.

 

I strongly suspect no one here cares what you merely believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how IH uses the same reasoning as muslim apologists.  It reverts back to 'IH believes what IH wants to believe' and the muslims believe what they want to believe.

 

But IH will present his version of bible god as fact.  Just like the muslims present allah as fact.  Just like other christians present their versions of yeshitwa/jesus/allah/yaweh as fact.

 

This is why science is different from religion. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I believe appearance of design points to a designer.

 

 

 

That is called gullible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Manonmars does give several reasons to think God exists.

 

From Part Two:

 

One of J.T.’s more self-incriminating refutations centers on the argument from Christians regarding the apparent design of the world. To this argument, J.T. asks rhetorically, “And does the universe look designed?”, to which he answers by saying, “Well, no. The universe creates order all by itself which is exactly the universe we would expect to find ourselves in if there was no God” (15:23). Quite humorously, even the aforementioned atheist Richard Dawkins sees the obvious appearance of design in nature. On page one of his book, The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins writes, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."

 

 

Appearance of design is not design.

 

Try harder.

 

 

You say appearance of design is not design.

I believe appearance of design points to a designer.

I believe fairies magically make it rain when I have a free day to go outside, but that doesn't make it true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.