Suffering for the Sins of the World

[TheRedneckProfessor]

10 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

 

Always a possibility.

 

 

So the bible was written by fallible men based on feelings which they could have misinterpreted.  Why would you use house built on sand as the standard upon which to base your life and worldview?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

12 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Please demonstrate that certainty.

I'm certain.

 

 

Was that an adequate demonstration, or would you like me to make a video?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

8 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I'm certain.

 

 

Was that an adequate demonstration, or would you like me to make a video?

Well, just in case...

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

35 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I think there is a warning in the Bible.

 

Indeed.

 

Both you and that Muslim are playing with fire (literally!) when both of you use only your feelings to decide where you will  spend eternity.

 

If he's right then it's Jannah (Paradise) for him and Saqar (hell) for you.

 

If you're right it's heaven for you and hell for him.

 

But neither of you will actually know until it's too late.

 

Is that the kind of risk you're prepared to take, Ed?

[Edgarcito]

Just now, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I'm certain.

 

 

Was that an adequate demonstration, or would you like me to make a video?

No, that's not very tricky.  You are the one that believes in natural evidence.  Show us that natural evidence.  THEN tell me why my feelings could be errant.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

45 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

No, that's not very tricky.  You are the one that believes in natural evidence.  Show us that natural evidence.  THEN tell me why my feelings could be errant.

1. What, specifically, do I seem certain about?

2. How, exactly, am I supposed to use science to demonstrate my own personal certainty about whatever subject you think it is that I am certain about?

3. No.  I do not believe in natural evidence.  If it is legitimate evidence, I understand it and accept it.

4. Why should I entertain the possibility of having a serious conversation about certainty with someone whose sense of certainty is based on the misinterpreted feelings of ancient goat herders?

5. Your god is evil. 

6. How does someone who claims to be a scientist end up not even knowing how science works?

[Edgarcito]

19 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

1. What, specifically, do I seem certain about?

2. How, exactly, am I supposed to use science to demonstrate my own personal certainty about whatever subject you think it is that I am certain about?

3. No.  I do not believe in natural evidence.  If it is legitimate evidence, I understand it and accept it.

4. Why should I entertain the possibility of having a serious conversation about certainty with someone whose sense of certainty is based on the misinterpreted feelings of ancient goat herders?

5. Your god is evil. 

6. How does someone who claims to be a scientist end up not even knowing how science works?

He deflects that one out of the park.... the crowd goes wild.  Wait, what is wild?  Well, we don't know really, but we are certain Christians don't know either.  So, back to the ballgame.

 

Just quit John,   Ask Chris to come back.  You suck at this job.

 

edit: deflection, ad hominem, semantics, and arguing from authority...  a fkn record dude.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

14 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

He deflects that one out of the park

Pointing out the absurdity of your demands is hardly deflecting, Ed.  You claim to be a scientist, which means you should know that science does not deal in certainty.  You should be able to realize on your own that you are asking for something that you are in no position to ask for, and cannot be given under the parameters you demand. 

 

You are simply throwing out a red herring to distract everyone from your own admission that the bible--your standard--is nothing more than a collection of misinterpreted feelings scribbled down by ignorant herdsmen.  And you're back to the personal attacks, which means you've got nothing else to support your position or move the conversation forward.

 

Your god is evil, Ed, if he even exists at all.  Trashing me isn't going to change that.

[walterpthefirst]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

No, that's not very tricky.  You are the one that believes in natural evidence.  Show us that natural evidence.  THEN tell me why my feelings could be errant.

 

As a scientist you should know that it falls to the proposer (you) to cite evidence for what you claim.

 

It does not fall to the Professor to show his evidence to counter yours.

 

The calculated deflection was yours Ed, not the Prof's.

 

As you well know.

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

No, that's not very tricky.  You are the one that believes in natural evidence.  Show us that natural evidence.  THEN tell me why my feelings could be errant.

 

I have put you in the spotlight about the errancy of feelings, Ed.

 

Which one of you, the Muslim or Edgardito, is right - seeing as you both use feelings?

 

I'll therefore repeat my post so that you can answer it.

[walterpthefirst]

  2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

I think there is a warning in the Bible.

 

Indeed.

Both you and that Muslim are playing with fire (literally!) when both of you use only your feelings to decide where you will  spend eternity.

If he's right then it's Jannah (Paradise) for him and Saqar (hell) for you.

If you're right it's heaven for you and hell for him.

But neither of you will actually know until it's too late.

 

Is that the kind of risk you're prepared to take, Ed?

[Edgarcito]

18 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

As a scientist you should know that it falls to the proposer (you) to cite evidence for what you claim.

 

It does not fall to the Professor to show his evidence to counter yours.

 

The calculated deflection was yours Ed, not the Prof's.

 

As you well know.

 

 

 

It's really not hard to imagine that as set of chemical reactions in the body are responsible for what we label as feelings/emotions.  He's the one saying it's evidence that he uses.  Then show me the chemistry and physics behind the process that yields emotions.  I'm saying I can't.  He's saying I can't but doesn't offer how his understanding is any better.  Then deflects, then calls names, then argues definitions, and then argues from authority.

 

Then I say I'm done with this thread and come back the next day to "@edgarcito" with another paragraph of rote atheist arguments with added ego.  It's laughable.

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

THEN tell me why my feelings could be errant.

Ever fell in love or known someone to fall in love with someone that was abusive or cheated? ................ 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

4 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

He's the one saying it's evidence that he uses.  Then show me the chemistry and physics behind the process that yields emotions. 

I never claimed that chemistry or physics were behind any processes that yield emotions.  This was a claim that you made.  Therefore I am under no obligation to offer any evidence to support the claim.  You are.

 

7 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I'm saying I can't.  He's saying I can't but doesn't offer how his understanding is any better. 

I never claimed that my understanding is any better; therefore I am under no obligation to offer you anything toward that claim.

 

8 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Then deflects, then calls names, then argues definitions, and then argues from authority.

Please provide evidence, in the form of direct quotes or screenshots, to support these claims.

 

9 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

It's laughable.

Then why are you whining about it?

[Edgarcito]

Feelings shouldn't matter really anyhow to most everyone here.  We are just an arrangement of matter that yields X.  The novel thing is that his X doesn't even impress much.  There were some actual thinkers here over the years.  Grandpa Harley, Antlerman, Hans, Florduh, some that don't talk much.  His arrangement from the video just appears to be a blob of fat that yields ego.

 

[Edgarcito]

4 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

Ever fell in love or known someone to fall in love with someone that was abusive or cheated? ................ 

Yes sir.

[Edgarcito]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I never claimed that chemistry or physics were behind any processes that yield emotions.  This was a claim that you made.  Therefore I am under no obligation to offer any evidence to support the claim.  You are.

 

I never claimed that my understanding is any better; therefore I am under no obligation to offer you anything toward that claim.

 

Please provide evidence, in the form of direct quotes or screenshots, to support these claims.

 

Then why are you whining about it?

You have been whining like someone's wife about this for weeks now.  God almightly, YOU quit whining.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

Yes sir.

Then its obvious feelings are errant. Humans have made horrible decisions based on emotion. Its never good to make a decision based solely on emotion.

 

*edit* these men who wrote the Bible. Based their writings on the feelings and biases of their time and culture. Their God reflects them. An ancient culture that never really had any real power. Someone else was always over them. Egyptians, Persians, baylonians, Roman's. If their God was real. He was an abusive God that let his people be enslaved. And those same people blamed themselves and wrote books about it. It must have been because we didn't do things right. It was our fault. We sinned. Etc. 

 

You and I both fell in love with the same God. 

 

Let's see what my former love, and your current love do...... 

 

God usually doesn't answer phone calls. (Prayers)

 

He tells us constantly we aren't worthy of him in his word. Repeatedly. To him we deserve to burn for eternity. And tells its only through him that we will ever have any true happiness. (Controlling much?) 

 

No matter how "good" you try to be for him. Your NEVER Good enough. Because your just a lowly sinner from birth.

 

He cheated on his last wife (the Jews) and left her for a hotter Gentile wife. 

 

He tells everyone that falls in love with him a different story. (There are 45,000 denominations in the world)

 

If we don't keep loving him and obeying him he'll kill us. But not just kill us. Kill us and torture us for as long as HE lives. (Eternity)

 

Is always watching everything we do. (Stalker) 

 

1corinthians 5:5 tells us he will destroy our body to save our spirit if we don't play by his rules. 

 

Makes promises but doesn't keep them. 

 

Tells you to give everything to him. But offers very little in return..... unless you die. Then you'll get everything and more. 

 

@Edgarcito

      Your in a toxic relationship. Feelings are errant.

 

But he makes you happy and he loves you right? Does he promise not to do it again? 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Ed, perhaps it's time to step away from the computer, grab yourself a beer, and watch some Law & Order.  We'll pick this back up when you're feeling better.

[pantheory]

6 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Pan doesn't agree with the dark energy stuff floating around I'm thinking.  Lol, did you see what I did there, floating around?

 

Yeah, you're right Ed. I think dark energy, dork matter, Inflation, the expansion of space, and the entire Big Bang model are all BS. But still, Edgarcito, with all due respect that you deserve IMO, even the stupidity of some sciences are still a giant leap better than believing in Greek mythology which is the category that I put Christianity and all of today's religions in.  Faith in something that can't be seen or tested needs to be seriously reconsidered by followers based upon the evidence, or complete lack thereof concerning the belief in God, in the Bible and in Christianity, IMO.

 

But maybe the best parts of Christianity and other religions are nice philosophies to live by for many, afterlife or not.

[pantheory]

3 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Ed, perhaps it's time to step away from the computer, grab yourself a beer, and watch some Law & Order.  We'll pick this back up when you're feeling better.

 

Sounds good to me also, maybe with a little popcorn and a woman upon agreement. 

[duderonomy]

8 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

And how did you infer or deduce that figure?

 

 

 

 

Science™!

 

[midniterider]

*watches the saga continue*

[duderonomy]

11 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

And how did you infer or deduce that figure?

 

 

 

 

Sorry Walter, but I've been told to give our discussion of these things a rest or blah blah blah or maybe do this at blah blah blah, but do not ever do this kind of shit again where you talk about Lion's Den stuff in the Lion's Den.

 

It seems that you were open to discussing stuff across various threads, and so am I, but it looks to me like we have both stumbled into the room that Ed and the Prof have reserved for themselves for almost ten years or something, and who am I to disagree? 

[walterpthefirst]

3 hours ago, duderonomy said:

 

 

Sorry Walter, but I've been told to give our discussion of these things a rest or blah blah blah or maybe do this at blah blah blah, but do not ever do this kind of shit again where you talk about Lion's Den stuff in the Lion's Den.

 

It seems that you were open to discussing stuff across various threads, and so am I, but it looks to me like we have both stumbled into the room that Ed and the Prof have reserved for themselves for almost ten years or something, and who am I to disagree? 

 

I'm happy that, like me, you are adjusting your conduct for the good of this community, Duderonomy.