WalterP Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 You are the one using the scripture to justify your belief that the word of God requires the believer to answer your question about why they believe. My response was merely citing the reason why I believe your circular argument is invalid. I didn't reply because I had to, but because I wanted to. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justus, I cited I Peter 3:15 "to sanctify the Lord God in your hearts and be ready always to give an answer to every man that ask you a reason of the hope that is in you." As an Ex-Christian I have no religious or supernatural belief that these are the word of God. Therefore, since I was simply quoting scripture and not using scripture to validate scripture, I was not making any kind of circular argument. So, you are mistaken in your belief that I was making a circular argument. But if you want to believe otherwise, so be it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterP Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 Posted 9 hours ago 19 hours ago, WalterP said: Quote .Do you know who it is that those who are told to sanctify by being ready always to give an answer to every man that ask for the substance of the thing hoped for in them, the evidence of the things unseen. If the identity of this 'who' is to be found in the Bible, then that's another invalid circular argument, Justus. Nope Justus is not 'who', but do you really think you would be able to find 'who' it is if it is in the Bible without hearing 'who' it is since a person doesn't know they don't even know something until they first learn of that which they didn't know. So how did you come to the knowledge that if you made a claim there was a onus upon you to substantiate your claim with evidence? On 2/12/2020 at 3:22 PM, TruthSeeker0 said: 12 hours ago, WalterP said: When I was deeply committed to evangelical Christianity I certainly had no idea that if I made a claim, the onus was upon me to substantiate that claim with evidence. If you claim that you had no idea that if you made a claim that the onus is upon you to substantiate that claim with evidence, then if the onus is upon you to substantiate a claim you make then where did you get the idea from that the onus was upon you? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry Justus, but there are just too many clauses in your sentences for me to pick out what you actually mean by them. Try again or give up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 17 hours ago, Justus said: If you claim that you had no idea that if you made a claim that the onus is upon you to substantiate that claim with evidence, then if the onus is upon you to substantiate a claim you make then where did you get the idea from that the onus was upon you? This one time I had a really big onus on me but my brother saw it and whacked it with a two by four. Knocked out three of my teeth, it did. They was all rotted anyway. That's when we lived in the cabin. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 22 hours ago, Justus said: I guess that I was hoping that they were saying that if they had been a Christian that their response would have been ....yada yada yada, so I wasn't the only one here it seems who never claimed to be a Christian or subscribed to Christianity theology, my inquiry to his comment was obviously in error. Never claimed to be a Christian? So is Jesus your Lord and Savior? Or is Jesus not your Lord and Savior? And what is the origin of this Holy Ghost of yours? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted February 25, 2020 Super Moderator Share Posted February 25, 2020 22 hours ago, Justus said: Oh my bad, since you know the person who wrote the comment then you would obviously know if he was or not without having to rely upon the syntax. I guess that I was hoping that they were saying that if they had been a Christian that their response would have been ....yada yada yada, so I wasn't the only one here it seems who never claimed to be a Christian or subscribed to Christianity theology, my inquiry to his comment was obviously in error. You're thinking of the TruthSeeker0 who posts over there on weneverclaimedtobechristian.net. Wrong website, bro. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LogicalFallacy Posted February 25, 2020 Moderator Share Posted February 25, 2020 22 hours ago, Justus said: Oh my bad, since you know the person who wrote the comment then you would obviously know if he was or not without having to rely upon the syntax. Yes. We would also know that he is a she 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 40 minutes ago, midniterider said: Never claimed to be a Christian? Nope So is Jesus your Lord and Savior? Nope Or is Jesus not your Lord and Savior? ---- And what is the origin of this Holy Ghost of yours? If by origin you mean the the point or place where something begins, arises, or is derived then my answer would be the beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 10 hours ago, WalterP said: Sorry Justus, but there are just too many clauses in your sentences for me to pick out what you actually mean by them. Try again or give up? You response is sufficient, if you can pick out what I meant otherwise I will let someone else explain it to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 1 hour ago, LogicalFallacy said: Yes. We would also know that he is a she If you claim Truthseeker is a she then I believe you when you say you know she is, that is why I used the 'he' in the syntax of gender neutral because 'man' can be either a male or female. Yet ironically you never had a clue that child born unto a virgin would be a female or do you not believe that parthenogenesis is possible in humans and that a child born from a zygote formed without cell fusion between the gametes of a male and female are only known to produce an xx offspring in humans? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LogicalFallacy Posted February 25, 2020 Moderator Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 hours ago, Justus said: If you claim Truthseeker is a she then I believe you when you say you know she is, that is why I used the 'he' in the syntax of gender neutral because 'man' can be either a male or female. Well thank you for believing me. Man can indeed refer to humanity as a whole, (I point to possibly the most famous line where "man" has been used like this: That's one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind". However he & him and she & her are not gender neutral according to my understanding of English (Limited as it is). They and them is. Ok that was tongue in cheek fun. 3 hours ago, Justus said: Yet ironically you never had a clue that child born unto a virgin would be a female or do you not believe that parthenogenesis is possible in humans and that a child born from a zygote formed without cell fusion between the gametes of a male and female are only known to produce an xx offspring in humans? You are losing me here. (I note you also lost Walter... either its both of us... or its the way you put things). What is the point here? I know of no known confirmed case of parthenogenesis in humans. (You'll forgive me for ignoring the story that arose from mistranslated passages that people tried to make out to be fulfillment of prophesy) Hang on I'll check google. Yeah, no confirmed cases of parthenogenesis. There are known parthenogeneic abnormalities in humans - cases of a cell growing hair and skin cells, but these turn into a tumor. There are cases of both male and female that are parthenogenetic chimeras, but this is not true parthenogenesis. However, according to my studies you are correct that if there was a true case of parthenogenesis the offspring would be female. Which brings us to the question... where did God get the Y chromosome for Jesus? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Joshpantera Posted February 25, 2020 Moderator Share Posted February 25, 2020 From a spoken incantation spell, of course..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted February 25, 2020 Super Moderator Share Posted February 25, 2020 If I had a nickel for every time I questioned, "Y god, Y?" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 Dear Holy Ghost, Could you tell us what Justus' beliefs are? Just write us a message please. Or heck just write us a message about anything you like. Right here in this thread. Maybe the letters could fly off my screen and glow in midair for a while. Then I'd know it was you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterP Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 20 hours ago, Justus said: You response is sufficient, if you can pick out what I meant otherwise I will let someone else explain it to you. Now here's where you and I differ, Justus. If someone told me that they couldn't understand what I was saying, I wouldn't leave it to a third party to explain what I meant. I'd do it myself. But since you can't be bothered to explain yourself to me, I'll match you and not be bothered about what you were trying to say. That makes us even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 No one, including you has had a god moment, because there is no such thing as god. Most of us here had what we thought were god moments, but later realised it was just wishful thinking/hallucination/crowd hype/co incidence etc. So it's nothing to be sad about, we have not walked away from god, as there is no god. We walked away from the beliefs that were taught to us from a young age. We simply realised god doesn't exist. Prayers aren't answered and there is no one out there intervening in any way. That's why there is so much bad stuff in the world.. But there is also good stuff. We as humans can do the best we can to add to the good stuff as much as possible, and deal with the bad stuff as best we can. 5 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntiChrist Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 On 2/3/2020 at 3:48 AM, Lost_more_then_Once said: I hope I'm not barging in, or being too disrespectful here for you all, but I have a question. Really I guess it's a concern more then a question, but it is a question nonetheless. Before any of you guys left Christianity, did you have any experiences of faith? Or did you know of someone else's experiences? I guess the question comes down to if you ever had a "God moment," where in some big or small way you found Him. That's the question and the concern all wrapped up in one. Again I'm sorry if this sounds disrespectful or "holier then though" kind of vibe. That's not my intent. Finding God's love in the mist of a depression as a kid was part of my realizing that there's no question that God exists or not, but only a question of who God is, and what to do from there. So this is expecially sad for me to hear people say that they never knew God exists. More so if it comes from those who used to be Christian. Have any of you guys ever had a "God moment?" Or have you had more then one? If so what made you want to leave?. If you haven't, would you be open to hearing experiences? How do you know a God exists universally? That's the question I asked myself, and I arrived at a interesting conclusion. I had to accept that to answer that question, it can not be dependent on what other people believe, what I believe or what my inner emotional experiences are telling me about reality. Because all those methods of determining the facts in this case are completely internalized, and knowing God under those conditions would leave me with a closed concept of the creator. From there I had to use my limited senses, and study the natural world and the universe to glean any possible answer. My conclusions are that the motivator of the universe designed it intentionally to run itself, and it does not require assistance. It is not broken, and it has not fallen into a corrupted state. The most dominant features of the universe seem to be either to create or destroy, life and death as they say. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ Weezer ◊ Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 hour ago, AntiChrist said: My conclusions are that the motivator of the universe designed it intentionally to run itself, and it does not require assistance. It is not broken, and it has not fallen into a corrupted state. The most dominant features of the universe seem to be either to create or destroy, life and death as they say. This is very similar to the conclusion I came to. But then a friend suggested that is based on the concepts we are aware of, that things have to be designed, or created. Where did the motivator/creator come from? If he/she/It has always existed, is it possible the universe has always existed? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntiChrist Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 42 minutes ago, Weezer said: This is very similar to the conclusion I came to. But then a friend suggested that is based on the concepts we are aware of, that things have to be designed, or created. Where did the motivator/creator come from? If he/she/It has always existed, is it possible the universe has always existed? I had this thought about two days ago, that maybe the reason humans are self aware (Unlike other animal's) is due to some cataclysmic event that disrupted the evolutionary process on this planet along time ago. So the earth afforded our species the luxury of self awareness specifically to correct the malfunction. Not to make it worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ Weezer ◊ Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 7 hours ago, AntiChrist said: I had this thought about two days ago, that maybe the reason humans are self aware (Unlike other animal's) is due to some cataclysmic event that disrupted the evolutionary process on this planet along time ago. So the earth afforded our species the luxury of self awareness specifically to correct the malfunction. Not to make it worse. Maybe my brain is groggy right now, but after reading your reply several times, I don't understand you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruthSeeker0 Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 20 hours ago, AntiChrist said: I had this thought about two days ago, that maybe the reason humans are self aware (Unlike other animal's) is due to some cataclysmic event that disrupted the evolutionary process on this planet along time ago. So the earth afforded our species the luxury of self awareness specifically to correct the malfunction. Not to make it worse. This would mean the Earth had a cataclysmic event with a purpose - to correct the malfunction. At least this is what you imply with your wording. That makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted April 11, 2020 Super Moderator Share Posted April 11, 2020 2 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said: This would mean the Earth had a cataclysmic event with a purpose - to correct the malfunction. At least this is what you imply with your wording. That makes no sense. Not necessarily. An asteroid wiping out the dinosaurs would qualify as a cataclysmic event. But there was neither purpose nor intent behind it, just natural laws such as gravity and inertia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntiChrist Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 4 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said: This would mean the Earth had a cataclysmic event with a purpose - to correct the malfunction. At least this is what you imply with your wording. That makes no sense. There's more to life than matter and energy. Why can't a living planet have a mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted April 11, 2020 Super Moderator Share Posted April 11, 2020 49 minutes ago, AntiChrist said: There's more to life than matter and energy. Why can't a living planet have a mind? Actually it's just a planet that happens to currently have some living things on it. Some of those things seem to have minds. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 1 hour ago, AntiChrist said: Why can't a living planet have a mind? I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruthSeeker0 Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 5 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: Not necessarily. An asteroid wiping out the dinosaurs would qualify as a cataclysmic event. But there was neither purpose nor intent behind it, just natural laws such as gravity and inertia. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now