Christians: Why would an all-good God base our salvation from Hell on whether or not we believe in a 2,000-year-old supernatural story?

[Realist]

 

 

No, I have a real answer.  But, as I said I am unwilling to share personal experience with you who will only mock and deride it as you do Scripture.   

 

 

 

Stranger

.... and here!!

[Stranger]

 

 ... so you have dodged here!

 

No, I didn't dodge.  My experiences wouldn't be considered more evidence.  They would be something to be mocked at and derided as I said.   

 

Do you own a gun?   Why do you dodge this question?

 

Stranger

[Stranger]

 

.... and here!!

 

?

 

Stranger

[Margee]

 

I can see that the angry christian has come out. I'm trying to have a dialog with you, for my tone has not been the greatest in my previous posts, but you adamantly refuse to allow that to happen. Your refusal to provide anything only weakens your position. Do you want other christians to read all this and fall from the faith? Oh wait, you've already stated how that doesn't concern you.

 

Your belief in god truly is only in your mind if you have no truth to base it on. You may think god is real, but you are only pushing that he does not. You will not go to heaven because no such place exists. Like your god does not exist.

 

I've tried to backtrack from my sarcasm and have a civil conversation with you, but you will not allow that to happen. Because you refuse to move. Clearly you have no basis for your faith because you have so little that you won't even attempt to try and defend why you believe.

 

It is nauseating trying to converse with you. I tried to be nice, but apparently you just don't give a shit to even defend your position other than asserting that you don't need anything. You are the worst kind of unmovable christian.

Stranger is a programed Christian robot. What a damn  shame......

[midniterider]

 

Stranger is a programed Christian robot. What a damn  shame......

 

Some people love the structure of religion. Being told what to do and how to think fulfills them. It's definitely not for me.

[LogicalFallacy]

Whoa, now we see the true christian come out. It looks like the ex-christians have made Stranger reach the end of his tether where nothing is left but refusing to engage issues, vitriol and polemic.

 

 

Yes, your bad.  Why should I believe you will answer honestly?   Because you show a lack of consideration for anothers post?   

 

You probably should be skeptical of any answer I have. See if its backed up. I am the same with all posts. Of course when it comes to direct honesty one has to look at the entire situation. Considering I have corrected myself twice when I was wrong, and apologized to you for an underhand move, that might indicate a person honestly engaging in conversation. Now whether you believe that is up to you, but I'd warrant you don't want to believe I'm being honest, nor any other person here. I mean an Ex-christian being honest - is that possible under a christian world view?

 

 

Seems you have other posts I have answered to which you have yet responded.  Perhaps you should direct your attention to those.

 

Other posts? You mean posts you have addressed to me directly? I have done my best to answer all of those - if I missed one please point it out. You should notice that my replies are not one line assertions like yours, they are researched and thought out. You have yet to address anything in depth, but rather dodge the issues. You have point blank refused to answer BAA's simple questions.

 

If you mean why haven't I addressed EVERY post you have made, even to others, that is two fold. First my average time to do a decent post is around 20-30 minuets. I can't respond to every post. Second, not every topic we are discussing here is of particular interest to me in that I feel the need to respond. What nutrichuckles brought up, and your response however was deserving of an answer as it is a common theme that pops up.

 

 

  Or...did this strike a nerve somewhere?    What got you so worried?

 

No nerve struck, certainly not worried, in fact smiling because now we, and everyone else reading this, knows you've clean run out of bald assertions. You see you are making no ground, you are losing the argument, and its showing in your posts. 

 

 

I didn't assume your post was an attack.  I did assume you cannot know what you are talking about.    

 

Ironic, which part don't I know what I am talking about? The part you disagree with?

 

 

Yes, that God can convince you is true.  Does He want to?   Apparently not.

 

And if he doesn't want to, is there anything I can do to change that? Bearing in mind we have already covered that asking god to show himself doesn't work unless he wills it, so if he doesn't will it, what can we do?

 

 

Again, God doesn't care for your suggestions.  They don't matter.   You don't believe that any have an experience with God.  So your question is null and void.  And, dishonest.

 

Dodging the issue - obviously you haven't had an experience that you feel god could use to convince us. Now you try and claim that we are dishonest. I have never met a person who I could truly say after hearing their experience , that it was from the god they claim it was. That's not dishonesty. The question isn't void - you won't answer it, and then attempt to project your failure onto us. Tell me again who is dishonest?

 

 

So what.  Nothing changes what I believe.  My belief doesn't change with the forum I go to.  How silly.  Does yours?

 

Yeah, you missed the point again.

 

 

I don't expect 'niceties'.    I expect exactly what I have gotten.

 

So you've almost predetermined your own outcome here. Maybe you should rethink your strategy? Maybe backup your assertions with something other than the bible said?

 

 

Actually I am not your 'bro', unless your Father is God.     The authorities here will inform me that it t is time to leave.  When they do, I will.

 

*Sigh* It's a figure of speech. No my father is not God, and neither is yours. We can do DNA testing to determine who both our fathers are and PROVE it.

 

Don't panic - highly unlikely at this rate the mods will need to do anything. Pretty soon people are just going to stop engaging you because you have nothing to offer, and we've pretty much shown the world what fundamental Christianity is like.

 

 

I don't mind being challenged.  Do you?   

 

Not at all, I relish a challenge.

 

 

 

Well, apparently He doesn't want to reveal Himself to you.

 

Where does it say God weeps over your refusal to love Him?

 

My belief doesn't need your credibility.  As I said, my experiences would be treated by you and others the same way as you view Scripture.  So, again, I'll pass.

 

Stranger

 

 

 

 

Indeed, I am the worst kind of Christian.  The kind that can't be moved.

 

This is a clear indication of someone who will believe what they want regardless of any facts presented against that belief. 

 

 

  I believe I state my position fairly well.    I am satisfied with it.   

 

No, you just assert theological nonsense without backing any of it up, then you hold your head high and mighty and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

 

However to the position that you are unwilling to consider anything outside your own narrow beliefs then yes you state that well.

 

@nutrichuckles93 It's still worth engaging to an extent in that the lurkers can see the true face of fundamental Christianity. Once all the assertions are stripped away we are left with a person refusing to engage.

 

[nutrichuckles93]

True, I shouldn't speak for everyone. It's just maddening that it is impossible to even have a proper conversation with this one.

[Realist]

 

True, I shouldn't speak for everyone. It's just maddening that it is impossible to even have a proper conversation with this one.

..this is truly typical of his type ... that is why it is important to let him show his true colors. 

 

As far as I am concerned his message has absolutely NIL effect on me any more and it should not on any adult here. That is what knowledge will do for anyone watching him attempt to debate. You have the tools available online ... on sites like this. Do the hard yards YOURSELF and you will NEVER look back! Life will suddenly make an awful lot more sense than trying to force square pegs into round holes as one MUST do as a fundie! He is trying to tell you do not think for yourself .... a very dangerous space to be in!

 

You CANNOT debate with such a person until THEY might entertain at least the slightest doubt about their book or something in it! My rules for debate with any such christian are asking them that question before even being bothered. He made his position very clear right at the beginning!

 

Where I really have a problem is where this vile message is being forced upon younger generations as in my immediate families. I see constant brainwashing going on EVERY DAY from birth. I see kids from near babes in arms being rewarded in families for parroting the right words ... those that ask the wrong questions being despised! Equality in these families is based truly on belief! Bring on the day this filth is regarded as child abuse. It is long overdue!

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

I have said nothing about disproving the scriptures.

 

You have made some claims (which I have quoted) and now I'm simply asking you about them.

 

Here are my questions again.

 

Please answer them.

 

My three questions concerned the mathematical formula 2 + 2 = 4.

 

1.  Can you please demonstrate for me the fluidity of the evidence contained within the formula?

2.  Can you please show me why the answer (4) isn't a final conclusion?

3.  Can you please show me how the answer (4) is open to change?

 

Stranger,

 

You made these claims about science.

 

"What I said was you err because you trust what science says as final conclusions.  And they are not.  They are conclusions at this time only.   Open for change." 

 

"You err because you trust science to give you final conclusions, which it can't.   It is always still learning."

 

"You don't trust or expect science to offer final conclusions.    Which means your so called 'evidence' is very 'fluid'."  

 

Please defend them by answering my three questions.

 

Thank you,

 

BAA.

[LogicalFallacy]

 

True, I shouldn't speak for everyone. It's just maddening that it is impossible to even have a proper conversation with this one.

 

I hear you, I hear you.

 

I read his posts, sigh, consider my life's options, consider that its going to take some time to address the points one by one..... then I remember that 8 short months ago I gained so much from lurking and reading these same discussions with different actors.

 

BAA is so correct when he says the show must go on - not to try and convince any christian here, but to anyone reading and thinking. One more person that we make break free from their indoctrination. That one person is worth all the effort and frustration.

 

Christians are busy saving souls, we are busy saving humanity  

[Stranger]

 

Whoa, now we see the true christian come out. It looks like the ex-christians have made Stranger reach the end of his tether where nothing is left but refusing to engage issues, vitriol and polemic.

 

 

You probably should be skeptical of any answer I have. See if its backed up. I am the same with all posts. Of course when it comes to direct honesty one has to look at the entire situation. Considering I have corrected myself twice when I was wrong, and apologized to you for an underhand move, that might indicate a person honestly engaging in conversation. Now whether you believe that is up to you, but I'd warrant you don't want to believe I'm being honest, nor any other person here. I mean an Ex-christian being honest - is that possible under a christian world view?

 

 

Other posts? You mean posts you have addressed to me directly? I have done my best to answer all of those - if I missed one please point it out. You should notice that my replies are not one line assertions like yours, they are researched and thought out. You have yet to address anything in depth, but rather dodge the issues. You have point blank refused to answer BAA's simple questions.

 

If you mean why haven't I addressed EVERY post you have made, even to others, that is two fold. First my average time to do a decent post is around 20-30 minuets. I can't respond to every post. Second, not every topic we are discussing here is of particular interest to me in that I feel the need to respond. What nutrichuckles brought up, and your response however was deserving of an answer as it is a common theme that pops up.

 

 

No nerve struck, certainly not worried, in fact smiling because now we, and everyone else reading this, knows you've clean run out of bald assertions. You see you are making no ground, you are losing the argument, and its showing in your posts. 

 

 

Ironic, which part don't I know what I am talking about? The part you disagree with?

 

 

And if he doesn't want to, is there anything I can do to change that? Bearing in mind we have already covered that asking god to show himself doesn't work unless he wills it, so if he doesn't will it, what can we do?

 

 

Dodging the issue - obviously you haven't had an experience that you feel god could use to convince us. Now you try and claim that we are dishonest. I have never met a person who I could truly say after hearing their experience , that it was from the god they claim it was. That's not dishonesty. The question isn't void - you won't answer it, and then attempt to project your failure onto us. Tell me again who is dishonest?

 

 

Yeah, you missed the point again.

 

 

So you've almost predetermined your own outcome here. Maybe you should rethink your strategy? Maybe backup your assertions with something other than the bible said?

 

 

*Sigh* It's a figure of speech. No my father is not God, and neither is yours. We can do DNA testing to determine who both our fathers are and PROVE it.

 

Don't panic - highly unlikely at this rate the mods will need to do anything. Pretty soon people are just going to stop engaging you because you have nothing to offer, and we've pretty much shown the world what fundamental Christianity is like.

 

 

Not at all, I relish a challenge.

 

 

 

This is a clear indication of someone who will believe what they want regardless of any facts presented against that belief. 

 

 

No, you just assert theological nonsense without backing any of it up, then you hold your head high and mighty and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

 

However to the position that you are unwilling to consider anything outside your own narrow beliefs then yes you state that well.

 

@nutrichuckles93 It's still worth engaging to an extent in that the lurkers can see the true face of fundamental Christianity. Once all the assertions are stripped away we are left with a person refusing to engage.

 

 

When you say God does not exist, because science cannot prove Him, you don't know what you are talking about.   As I said before, all science can say is it doesn't know.

 

If one wants to be saved one need only come to Jesus Christ. 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved'.  

 

Your question is dishonest because you don't believe in God.  Therefore a persons experience with God cannot be believed by you.   This, as I have said is exactly why it is useless for me to share a personal experience I have had with God.   You wouldn't believe it.  You would only mock it.

 

My assertions come from the Bible.   No need to rethink any strategy.

 

But, my Father is God.  I am literally born of Him.  I have His DNA.   The body I have which came from Adam carries Adams DNA.   But my spirit has been born-again.  And when this body dies I will one day get a new body from God. Not connected to Adam.   No figure of speech.

 

No, I don't believe what I want.  I do believe the Bible.

 

Well, nonsense to you of course.   Not of the senses.   Of the spirit.    Are you trying to portray me as 'proud'?    I would say you are wrong.   But go ahead.  Build your man.

 

Stranger

 

 

[Stranger]

 

 

Stranger,

 

You made these claims about science.

 

"What I said was you err because you trust what science says as final conclusions.  And they are not.  They are conclusions at this time only.   Open for change." 

 

"You err because you trust science to give you final conclusions, which it can't.   It is always still learning."

 

"You don't trust or expect science to offer final conclusions.    Which means your so called 'evidence' is very 'fluid'."  

 

Please defend them by answering my three questions.

 

Thank you,

 

BAA.

 

If you disagree with my statements then simply show me why.   As I said, I am not interested in answering your three questions.  Just show how your 2+2=4 disproves what I said. 

 

Stranger

 

 

[♦ ficino ♦]

 

 

 

 

But, my Father is God.  I am literally born of Him.  I have His DNA.   The body I have which came from Adam carries Adams DNA.  

Stranger is not speaking on behalf of historic Christianity, but on behalf of some other religion. God has no body nor any parts of bodies. God does not have a spirit. "God is spirit", John 4:24. "A spirit has not flesh and bones," Luke 24:39.

 

All the historic creeds insist that God has no parts or passions. 

 

[Stranger]

 

Stranger is not speaking on behalf of historic Christianity, but on behalf of some other religion. God has no body nor any parts of bodies. God does not have a spirit. "God is spirit", John 4:24. "A spirit has not flesh and bones," Luke 24:39.

 

All the historic creeds insist that God has no parts or passions. 

 

 

God is Spirit.  God has a body....Jesus Christ. 

 

Stranger

[★ Citsonga ★]

 

At least I respond to questions addressed to me. 

 

You did not respond to a single thing in posts 537-544. Just sayin'.

 

 

[Stranger]

 

 

You did not respond to a single thing in posts 537-544. Just sayin'.

 

 

 

Ask it in a forum type message.  Not a book.    That was addressed.

 

Stranger

[♦ ficino ♦]

 

 

God is Spirit.  God has a body....Jesus Christ. 

 

Stranger

Oh, so the Bible contradicts itself. Good to know.

 

The other possibility is that you are not an exponent of historic Christianity but of something else. Are you a Mormon?

 

The 2nd person of the Trinity, acc to historic Christianity, took on a human nature and became incarnate, so that Mary became the Mother of God - since she was mother of the whole person, not mother of a "nature." The Father and the Holy Spirit did not become incarnate. The divine nature is not material, not a body, has no parts. There is no God DNA going into the DNA of Christians.

 

This isn't my problem, but it is worthwhile that the gap be made clear between your views and historic Christianity.

[★ Citsonga ★]

 

 

Ask it in a forum type message.  Not a book.    That was addressed.

 

Stranger

 

And that request was also addressed by me pointing out that those posts are broken down into a bunch of different topics which you could easily respond to one at a time.

 

The fact is, though, that you have no response. You've demonstrated over and over again that you have virtually no reasoning capabilities at all. Thus, it's not surprising if you're afraid to even begin attempting to tackle the plethora of problems that I raised in those posts.

 

[bornagainathiest]

Stranger,

 

You made these claims about science.

 

"What I said was you err because you trust what science says as final conclusions.  And they are not.  They are conclusions at this time only.   Open for change." 

 

"You err because you trust science to give you final conclusions, which it can't.   It is always still learning."

 

"You don't trust or expect science to offer final conclusions.    Which means your so called 'evidence' is very 'fluid'."  

 

Please defend them by answering my three questions.

 

Thank you,

 

BAA.

 

If you disagree with my statements then simply show me why.   As I said, I am not interested in answering your three questions.  Just show how your 2+2=4 disproves what I said. 

 

Stranger

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Very well, Stranger.

 

The sum of adding 2 with 2 is 4.

 

This is an absolute and does not change.  This is the final conclusion of that equation.  The evidence that adding 2 and 2 to equal 4 is not fluid.  

 

Therefore, your claim that science cannot give final conclusions is false.  It can and does.  Every time you use math you vindicate this.

 

 

 

It is now up to you to demonstrate, in this thread, that adding 2 to 2 can change.

 

It is now up to you to demonstrate, in this thread, that this is not the final conclusion of that equation.

 

It is now up to you to demonstrate, in this thread, that adding 2 and 2 can yield a different result.

 

Change these things.

 

 

 

 

[Stranger]

 

Oh, so the Bible contradicts itself. Good to know.

 

The other possibility is that you are not an exponent of historic Christianity but of something else. Are you a Mormon?

 

The 2nd person of the Trinity, acc to historic Christianity, took on a human nature and became incarnate, so that Mary became the Mother of God - since she was mother of the whole person, not mother of a "nature." The Father and the Holy Spirit did not become incarnate. The divine nature is not material, not a body, has no parts. There is no God DNA going into the DNA of Christians.

 

This isn't my problem, but it is worthwhile that the gap be made clear between your views and historic Christianity.

 

No, I am not a Mormon.  I am Christian.

 

The 2nd Person of the Trinity, God the Son, took on a body.   Before the Son took on a body, God was Spirit only.  But, though Spirit, He still was a Person and with shape. (John 5:37)  That shape was the very shape of the Man Jesus Christ.  (Heb. 1:3)  God has a body.  Jesus Christ.  

 

Stranger

[Stranger]

 

 

And that request was also addressed by me pointing out that those posts are broken down into a bunch of different topics which you could easily respond to one at a time.

 

The fact is, though, that you have no response. You've demonstrated over and over again that you have virtually no reasoning capabilities at all. Thus, it's not surprising if you're afraid to even begin attempting to tackle the plethora of problems that I raised in those posts.

 

 

Address your plethora one at  a time.  I will respond.

 

Stranger

[Stranger]

 

Stranger,

 

You made these claims about science.

 

"What I said was you err because you trust what science says as final conclusions.  And they are not.  They are conclusions at this time only.   Open for change." 

 

"You err because you trust science to give you final conclusions, which it can't.   It is always still learning."

 

"You don't trust or expect science to offer final conclusions.    Which means your so called 'evidence' is very 'fluid'."  

 

Please defend them by answering my three questions.

 

Thank you,

 

BAA.

 

If you disagree with my statements then simply show me why.   As I said, I am not interested in answering your three questions.  Just show how your 2+2=4 disproves what I said. 

 

Stranger

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Very well, Stranger.

 

The sum of adding 2 with 2 is 4.

 

This is an absolute and does not change.  This is the final conclusion of that equation.  The evidence that adding 2 and 2 to equal 4 is not fluid.  

 

Therefore, your claim that science cannot give final conclusions is false.  It can and does.  Every time you use math you vindicate this.

 

 

 

It is now up to you to demonstrate, in this thread, that adding 2 to 2 can change.

 

It is now up to you to demonstrate, in this thread, that this is not the final conclusion of that equation.

 

It is now up to you to demonstrate, in this thread, that adding 2 and 2 can yield a different result.

 

Change these things.

 

 

 

 

 

I have no problem with 2+2 equaling 4.     Why do you feel it is up to  me to demonstrate.  Your brought up 2+2=4 to make a point.  I didn't.   So explain your point using the questions you are asking.

 

Stranger

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

I have no problem with 2+2 equaling 4.     Why do you feel it is up to  me to demonstrate.  Your brought up 2+2=4 to make a point.  I didn't.   So explain your point using the questions you are asking.

 

Stranger

 

No problem.

 

You wrote...

"What I said was you err because you trust what science says as final conclusions.  And they are not.  They are conclusions at this time only.   Open for change." 

If your claims in the above sentence are true then it should be possible for you to demonstrate that 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4.  Or, if you'd prefer to select any other numbers with which to show us that math doesn't use final conclusions, please do so. 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

[LogicalFallacy]

 

When you say God does not exist, because science cannot prove Him,

 

Where did I say this? No where have I claimed god doesn't exist because science cannot prove it. 

 

 

If one wants to be saved one need only come to Jesus Christ. 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved'.

 

We come back to: what are we being saved from?... haven't we had this conversation?

 

 

Your question is dishonest because you don't believe in God. 

 

Questions aren't dishonest because of a belief anyone holds. That's an excuse because you know you've run out of any decent argument. I could quite easily say you are being dishonest by being here because you do believe in god. Your statement is a non sequitur. It does not follow that anyone's question is dishonest because of any belief they hold. 

 

 

Therefore a persons experience with God cannot be believed by you.   This, as I have said is exactly why it is useless for me to share a personal experience I have had with God.   You wouldn't believe it.  You would only mock it.

 

So you have already determined, before you rely your experience, that there is no point in sharing. Great. It's probably true, that based on all other experiences I've heard, that your one is unlikely to make much impact on me, but I'd like to hear it. And no I wouldn't mock your experience. I mock your insistence on asserting that which you cannot show to be true. That's difference from mocking YOU.

 

 

My assertions come from the Bible.   No need to rethink any strategy.

 

We know - that's the problem, you cannot back up anything from the bible, and clearly as discussed above refuse to. May I ask what you are doing here? I'm really interested in what you are trying to achieve? You don't seem to be doin your hardest to convince us or save us or else you'd ignore what you think we might say and relay your experience etc as testimony anyway. So what is your goal here?

 

 

But, my Father is God.  I am literally born of Him.  I have His DNA.   The body I have which came from Adam carries Adams DNA.   But my spirit has been born-again.  And when this body dies I will one day get a new body from God. Not connected to Adam.   No figure of speech.

 

Right, yes, so true, yeah my father is Zeus, I'm descended from his son Hercules - we share the same DNA. Stranger, I was a Christian, I believed all that, but its not true, so unless you have something that I haven't thought of that shows your DNA has gods DNA (Which by extension every human.... nay, every life form on earth, will have... which would make a bacteria gods son....) you are again simply making theological assertions.

 

 

No, I don't believe what I want.  I do believe the Bible.

 

Oxymoron right there

 

 

Well, nonsense to you of course.   Not of the senses.   Of the spirit.    Are you trying to portray me as 'proud'?    I would say you are wrong.   But go ahead.  Build your man.

 

I was saying you are self deceiving yourself into thinking you have made a good argument (Hence the 'pat on the head'). Do you think you are proud?

 

Let me rephrase my wording in that last sentence - nonsense may have been the wrong word for constructive dialogue

 

"No, you just assert theological claims without backing any of it up, then you hold your head high and mighty and pat yourself on the back for a job well done. "

 

So have I changed the meaning of the sentence by changing the word? If you cannot back up what you are saying, then I say the sentence holds true in both its forms.

 

 

 

[midniterider]

 

 

When you say God does not exist, because science cannot prove Him, you don't know what you are talking about.   As I said before, all science can say is it doesn't know.

 

Stranger

 

 

 

Msg 813 .

 

 

When you say Invisible Pink Unicorns do not exist because science cannot prove them....

 

you are wrong.

 

all science can say is, it doesn't know.

 

Therefore the IPU is real.