please answer ex-christians!!!

[Thurisaz]

Reality, 1. Morontheist, 0. Case closed.

[Astreja]

*sings*  I fought reality and reality always wiiiins..

[Astreja]

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

Jon?

anything?

hello?

 

I think he may have self-raptured.

[Geezer]

12 minutes ago, Astreja said:

 

I think he may have self-raptured.

 

[Tsathoggua9]

I never took it that seriously, myself. From a fairly early age, I read the bible and a lot of other so-called "holy texts", comparative mythology, etc. Also read paleontology and anthropology and general science books. I concluded that the bible is no more or less factual than Greek of Norse myths. I still went to church services until just a few years ago, but never was a "true believer". 

[LogicalFallacy]

2 hours ago, Astreja said:

 

I think he may have self-raptured.

Brutal in a sweet #wreaked kind of way

 

Hopefully he comes back and asks questions, though we may have hit him with the reality bat too hard and sent him to shit crazy land?

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

8 minutes ago, LogicalFallacy said:

Brutal in a sweet #wreaked kind of way

 

Hopefully he comes back and asks questions, though we may have hit him with the reality bat too hard and sent him to shit crazy land?

 

Gotta say he came in with the wrong attitude tho. So IMHO he asked for it. Maybe his pastor told him to stay away from the heathen before we took him away from God....... oh wait, hold on..... What's this in John chapter 10:27-29?

 

27  My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

 28  And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

 29  My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand

 

Yeah that can't be it because Jesus said it couldn't happen. It must have been self rapture.

 

DB

[Jon]

I'm still here,and still standing for jesus.

But thanks ,my attitude was wrong,i always took athiests as opponents to christ,which i've learned is not true,from you brilliant people in this forum.

Now i know your not the enemy,never were.

I was told this was a debate sight,hence "lions den".

Can you tell me any forums i can go on to debate,i think debate is critical-look how you made me see,you arn't my enemy.

Also i think you folk are still the best to ask christian/biblicle questions becauce now self interest has gone and you will no longer be biased.

Is there anywhere on this blog i can post questions?

[Travi]

The Lion's Den (your current location) is usually where debates go on between believers and the non-believers. Lion's Den rules state: "Attention "True Christians™" and former Christians.

This is the section of the board where Christian opinions, arguments, sermons and so on will be more-or-less tolerated. Aggressive evangelism is permitted in this section, but aggressive evangelists should be ready to be met by equally aggressive resistance.

An occasionally heated response is allowed and sometimes even encouraged. However, all posters to the Lion's Den are still expected to adhere the general rules of decorum as delineated in the Forum Guidelines. In other words, conversations in the Lion's Den are intended to be permissively unrestrained without devolving into repetitious verbal abuse. Those who are identified as repeatedly abusive -- in this section or any section of this website -- may be suspended or banned from posting without notice."

Note: In view of the fiery nature of the discussions which occur in the Lion's Den, only those with a fairly thick skin should participate.

For more orderly and serious debate, go to the "Colosseum."

For controlled formal debate, go to the "Arena."

 

Usually, as you will see - most believers come to this area to discuss and debate. ironhouse and End3 come to mind, with their own specific views and sides of argument. So, if you want to ask questions and generally have a conversation/debate with people, this is a good starting point.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

What Travi said.  Also, if you'd like help with spelling and grammar, we'd be happy to oblige.

[Jon]

ha ha redneck,can tell you was a christian before,always pointing out fault. 

only kidding,why are christians so judgmental?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

The answer is multi-faceted, I'm sure.  It has to do with the "us vs. them" instinct; coupled with the arrogance of god's divine destiny.

[L.B.]

@Jon

 

I've asked before in other threads (and you've ignored me):

 

Why is YOUR version of Christianity the one we should be believing in? Why not double-predestinarian Orthodox Presbyterianism? Why not Third-Wave New Apostolic Reformation Charismatic Christianity?

 

Each and every denomination presents a completely unique "Jesus" and a completely unique soteriology. They logically must, or they have no reason to exist over against each other.

 

I've also said that if you want to debate, I'd be glad to debate you in as formal and structured a format as you're comfortable with. @florduh - this marks the second time I'm tagging you and saying I am going on record as willing to debate Jon or any other Christian who wants to participate.

 

Suggest a topic that's not a logical fallacy or an impossibility, and we can do battle in the debate arena whenever you're ready.

[florduh]

Jon, you have a willing opponent. Please state your debate topic or call it off.

[disillusioned]

This guy takes me back. Suddenly I find myself craving steak sauce.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

41 minutes ago, disillusioned said:

This guy takes me back. Suddenly I find myself craving steak sauce.

Iv'e bene thimkgn tha saem thong.

[TheBluegrassSkeptic]

On 3/30/2017 at 8:23 AM, Jon said:

ha ha redneck,can tell you was a christian before,always pointing out fault. 

only kidding,why are christians so judgmental?

 

I find that Christians are not so much judgemental as defensive. Think about it. When reasoning comes along that flies in the face of what you have been programmed with, is not normal to become defensive? Judgemental behavior is just one of the defense mechanisms. 

[Jon]

ok ,explain pascals wager?

please no war (this is just a question).

 

[TheBluegrassSkeptic]

48 minutes ago, Jon said:

ok ,explain pascals wager?

please no war (this is just a question).

 

You might want to start a new thread for that

Or check out the forums. We've gone over this like a billion times

[TABA]

3 hours ago, Jon said:

ok ,explain pascals wager?

please no war (this is just a question).

 

 

This has indeed been discussed many times, but I will take a shot at answering Jon here and now...

 

So Pascal's wager is the idea that if I believe in God and he does not exist, there's no real harm done. I'll just die and be neither punished in Hell nor rewarded in Heaven. On the other hand if I don't believe in God and it turns out he does exist, then I'm fucked, Hell-bound for getting it wrong. 

 

Here's the problem, Jon: suppose I believe in the Christian God, Yahweh/Jesus. If it turns out the Muslims are right, I (and you, Jon) are fucked. If I place my bets instead on Allah and Muhammed and it turns out the Christians are right, then I'm fucked and Jon is saved. 

 

Or suppose there is a deity but instead of being what the Christians and Muslims think, it's actually a god that rewards those who believe things based on evidence and our god-given scientific abilities rather than whatever we were taught about gods by our parents based on where we (and they) were born. In that case, I may be saved and Jon may be screwed. 

 

Maybe others can explain it better, but from where I'm sitting, Pascal's wager is useless. 

 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Let me google that for you...

[disillusioned]

3 hours ago, Jon said:

ok ,explain pascals wager?

please no war (this is just a question).

 

Jon, is the problem that you don't understand Pascal's wager, or that you don't understand why it is not convincing? If it's the former, then I would suggest using Google, as the prof has already done. If it's the latter, then there are a number of reasons, but I'm afraid I can't do much better than ThereAndBackAgain has already done until you provide me with some more information. This is not to say that ThereAndBackAgain's response is inadequate; it simply strikes me that you may want more than one perspective. But, you see, it seems to me that in order for Pascal's wager to have any real meaning, one must first be very clear about what one means by "God". If you would offer your definition, then perhaps I could respond more adequately.

[florduh]

"Arguments" such as Pascal's are ridiculous for obvious reasons already mentioned. But there's another aspect people don't often address. You assume that belief is a choice and it is not. One can pretend and choose to go along, go through the motions and say all the right things but one cannot actually believe on command anymore than he can love someone on command. Either you can believe it or you can't. One may still desperately want to believe but not be able to swallow the fantastic tale as real.

[Jon]

My definition of God ,Jesus christ,God the father of the bible.

Creator and sustainor of the universe.

The life giving spirit,father of lights.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

19 minutes ago, Jon said:

My definition of God ,Jesus christ,God the father of the bible.

Creator and sustainor of the universe.

The life giving spirit,father of lights.

In other words, the "christian" god.  But, which one?  The catholic god?  The orthodox god?  Protestant?  Which denomination of protestant?  Pentecostal?  Which branch--Assemblies of God, Church of God, Foursquare?  Or maybe you believe in the Baptist god.  Again, which branch--Reformed, Southern?  Perhaps the Lutheran god... which one?  Evangelical, American Synod, Independent?

 

Do you see the problem?  Even if you assume you've chosen the "right" god, you still can't be sure you've chosen the right version of the right god.  It's not just about picking jesus only to find out allah is real; it's also about speaking in tongues when you should be praying the rosary.  If a god exists, it should be easier than this to find him.