Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God says this, and God says that
Chara
Inactive Member


Message 184 of 417 (26528)
12-13-2002 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by John
12-13-2002 4:02 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
Chara's post seems to be missing.
It was post #182, though now this one has that number.
Chara, did you erase it?

hmmmm ... that is odd, no I didn't erase it. I had just asked gene to define "revelation". Thanx for noticing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by John, posted 12-13-2002 4:02 PM John has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 5:57 PM Chara has not replied
 Message 188 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 6:07 PM Chara has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 185 of 417 (26531)
12-13-2002 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by Chara
12-13-2002 5:02 PM


Revelation being any information from God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Chara, posted 12-13-2002 5:02 PM Chara has not replied

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 186 of 417 (26533)
12-13-2002 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by John
12-11-2002 12:22 PM


Sorry John I lost this post, didn't see it. This has been a fairly heated fast moving thread. I've missed quite a few posts had to go back and read through what I've missed.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was talking about serving this King out of a personal desire to do so. Not because he commanded but because you have chosen him as your king and want to serve him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why does he get so pissed, according to legend, if one does not want to serve?
I'm not sure what you're talking about here. God gets angry at sin yes! Even more so when those who are his servants disobey him. However to those who serve him do so out of free-will. Not just because they live within his borders. This was one of the contrasts I was getting at between the King and earthly kings. God punishes us for disobeying him yes, but out of love not anger. He seeks to correct us not to get revenge.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By your own logic that's not a legitimate point because Crowley is a man, then how could he pick you up and heal your spirit. I was talking about God.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By my logic? You must be very confused. You read a book or heard the someone preach ( or many people ) and felt a feeling that your soul had been repaired or something to that effect. I read Diary of a Drug Fiend and felt the same. Both cases are identical, except for the book. It isn't my logic, it is yours that validates Crowley.
And what does Crowley being a man have to do with anything? The critical element is the use of the emotional reaction as justification.
I was refering to our discussion about free-will, when I had used the analogy of feeding my cat. You had said as soon as God knows what you will choose it's no longer free will. I replied saying, so if I put down food for my cat knowing that he will choose to eat it I have taken away his ability to choose if he will eat it or not. At which point you responded saying, no I could not affect my cat's free will because I was not God.
By this logic a man cannot have the same effect on another man as God can.
Now for one I was not speaking of an emotional reaction to a book. I was talking about a change in my very nature. Brought about by God. What you were saying about Crowley is an emotional response to a book.
I know this is not put well I am struggling to form thought to words (yet again I am frustrated by the limitation of language). I'm saying how can you equate a feeling you got from Crowley's book to a change in nature brought about by God. It's not even in the same league. Arrgghh this is not what I wanted to say. Hopefully your examination and questioning will help me to properly explain what I'm getting at.
------------------
saved by grace

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by John, posted 12-11-2002 12:22 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by John, posted 12-13-2002 6:44 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 187 of 417 (26534)
12-13-2002 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by gene90
12-13-2002 4:30 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
quote:
I can work with what is known, unlike you, who must assume something that isn't known.
Then you claim that there is evidence that there is no God?

I do not claim that there is evidence that there is no GOD. Jesus Christ, Gene !!!!!! I keep telling you what I believe and you keep stating the exact opposite. What kind of rationality is that? What kind of good faith effort at debate is that?
quote:
Then do you have reason to believe in no-God? Or are you running on faith? Or do you not know if I am right or wrong? Which is it?
BLOODY HELL... I said way back in post #43-- a response to you no less-- that I am technically agnostic. Wanna see?
I have said numerous times on this forum that I am technically agnostic. I see no evidence for god.
quote:
I don't object to your freedom of speech, I just think you're a bigot (and other things). In fact I think your freedom to say offensive things only supports my opinions of your character.
Your opinions hardly matter to me anymore, after this dose of the holy spirit. And now that I understand that being a bigot means "not agreeing with gene" it has kinda lost its bite.
quote:
More like Gene not liking being called, "evil", "dishonest", "stupid", and other things simply for being a Christian.
Excuse me, did I start this by saying GENE IS SOMETHING_OFFENSIVE? Nope. You imported the insults because you didn't like what I had to say about your post. You violated the rules of the board and basic common sense rules behavior. I didn't fill your name into the blanks and start spouting garbage. Whatever I may think of your religion, I did not bring it into this debate and I did not run you through a rumor mill. You did both. I treated you like I treat everybody. I built an opinion of you based on, in your case, how you respond to my comments here on this board. I'd have done the same if we met in person.
quote:
You said yourself that I should not have called you a bigot and a pedophile because I don't know you. How do you like it?
You have a real problem distinguishing between the general and the specific. Not to mention that problem you have of doing precisely what you don't want others doing.
quote:
And besides, your website supports my claims on your character. You have nothing but this board to assert that I personally am "evil", "stupid", "dishonest", etc. and you have absolutely nothing to assert that all my fellow Christians are those things.
You never answered my question. If I attacked the Church of Satan or the KKK, would you object? Or do you only get on your moral hobby-horse when someone criticises what Gene approves of? What about abortion? Is that an appropriate topic? May I criticise abortion clinic protesters? Alcohol manufacturers? Drug dealers? I don't know them either. Maybe you could post Gene's list of appropriate topics for criticism? Or maybe not. You've avoided the question twice now. Probably because you don't object to the criticism of groups like the KKK, or the Satanists; but you know that makes you damned hypocritical.
quote:
If you don't want to be called nasty things you should (1) not have given credence to support being called those things and (2) not have called other people nasty things.
Talk about flip-flopping flexible standards!!! Two wrongs make a right. You did it so I can too!!!!!!! LOL........ This is you justification for your lies and slander? !!!!!! ???????? And you object to my negative attitudes about christianity. LOLLLLLLLLLLLL..........
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 4:30 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 6:24 PM John has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 188 of 417 (26535)
12-13-2002 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by Chara
12-13-2002 5:02 PM


Chara's post has not vanished, if you are refering to the one with the quote from Hebrews. It is message 176 in this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Chara, posted 12-13-2002 5:02 PM Chara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-13-2002 6:27 PM gene90 has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 189 of 417 (26537)
12-13-2002 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by John
12-13-2002 6:07 PM


quote:
I do not claim that there is evidence that there is no GOD.
Good. We've ruled that possibility out. I can only think of two possibilities that remain: (1) Your position is faith-based, just as theism is or (2) for all you know I might be right.
If (1) is correct, then you are in no position to ridicule the concept of faith. If (2), you are in no position to rail against my belief system.
quote:
I said way back in post #43-- a response to you no less-- that I am technically agnostic.
"Technically agnostic". That's odd because an agnostic claims to lack enough evidence to discern whether or not there is a God -- hardly one who could honestly rule out any belief system. That puts you in situation (2) above. Incidentally, I've never encountered anyone who would confess to be an atheist. Even the most violently anti-religious people often claim to be "agnostics". Fundies claim that this is to avoid the social stigmas associated with the title of "atheist".
quote:
And now that I understand that being a bigot means "not agreeing with gene" it has kinda lost its bite.
You know why I think you're a bigot, and it has nothing to do with you not agreeing with me. A lot of people on this board don't agree with me, but I'm not calling them bigots, because most of them don't call me "stupid", "evil", and "dishonest" simply because of my religion.
But if it loses its bite, good. Maybe your arguments will improve.
quote:
Not to mention that problem you have of doing precisely what you don't want others doing.
Likewise. I've called you a bigot and you've called me some other things. We're in the same boat.
quote:
You never answered my question. If I attacked the Church of Satan or the KKK, would you object?
I see something evil about the KKK but not Christianity. The KKK has a political mandate, the church does not. If you hate minorities you join the KKK. If you believe in God you join a church. There is some difference there, but you don't see it, and your past comments equating the KKK with Christianity have, as far as I'm concerned, permanently destroyed your credibility. If we had an amusing quote of the month on the main page of this site, I think either of those would be shoe-ins, except that they make the whole board look bad.
What would drive you to hate Christianity so much I will never know, but I think you've shot yourself in the foot with your Klan remarks.
I have to wonder if there is any point in attempting to debate someone that bitter. But perhaps you can support your "agnostic" atheism.
quote:
Two wrongs make a right.
It was justified.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 12-13-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by John, posted 12-13-2002 6:07 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by John, posted 12-13-2002 7:34 PM gene90 has replied
 Message 240 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 12:10 PM gene90 has not replied

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 190 of 417 (26539)
12-13-2002 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by gene90
12-13-2002 6:07 PM


This conversation is weighing very heavy on my heart right now. Though yes I do find John's site offensive, Gene I find the lack of love in your posts lately equally disturbing. I'm not attacking either of you. Please don't take it as such. I know I also have responded in anger in this forum. How can we expect each other to listen to our posts if we continuosly slander each other and bicker. It's like a screaming match. If you are both yelling no-one is listening. If no-one is listening then nothing is being accomplished. This kind of stubborn bickering just leads to anger, not wisdom. When Forgiven appeared on this board he said "come let us reason". If we all put down our pride we will be able to speak with much more wisdom. I mean no offence to anyone. The basis of my faith is love. I believe this to be the basis of the teachings of Jesus Christ. Let's put the weapons down, and reason together, this war amongst each other will serve only to drive each other further away from what we are trying to convey. Maybe it is not my place to say this, and if it wasn't then I ask your forgiveness. I hope I did not sound judgemental.
------------------
saved by grace

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 6:07 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 6:50 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 191 of 417 (26541)
12-13-2002 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by funkmasterfreaky
12-13-2002 6:02 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
God punishes us for disobeying him yes, but out of love not anger. He seeks to correct us not to get revenge.
It doesn't matter why he does it. For whatever reason god punishes, the act of punishing serves to prod people into servitude. Hence, the claim that it is servitude of your own free will is tainted by the threat of punishment. If you wife slept with another man, would you be mad? Prolly. But if that other man held her at gunpoint? See the difference. God has us at gunpoint.
quote:
quote:
At which point you responded saying, no I could not affect my cat's free will because I was not God.
By this logic a man cannot have the same effect on another man as God can.
Then you have conflated different arguments, and misunderstood at least one of them.
You don't effect your cat's free will because you knowledge is not absolute. God's knowledge, in theory, is abolute and infallible.
quote:
Now for one I was not speaking of an emotional reaction to a book. I was talking about a change in my very nature.
Ummmm .... me too.
quote:
Brought about by God.
So you say. But I experienced the very same thing and you are desperately trying to argue that I didn't. Shall I argue that you didn't experience it either? I don't have to really. Any rationalization you have for my experience works for your as well. That is the problem.
quote:
What you were saying about Crowley is an emotional response to a book.
As is what happened to you, in relation to the word of God.
quote:
I'm saying how can you equate a feeling you got from Crowley's book to a change in nature brought about by God.
The same way you equate the feeling you got from the NT ( or the preacher, or whatever ) with a change brought about by God.
quote:
It's not even in the same league.
You don't know that. You have to believe it, but you don't know it. When I read that book, scales fell from my eyes. Or so I felt. I was floating on air for weeks and convinced, devoted even, for years. Even now, the core idea of that book is firmly entrenched in my being. I am also the first to admit that the man was largely insane, but that is another story.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-13-2002 6:02 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Chara, posted 12-13-2002 7:20 PM John has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 192 of 417 (26542)
12-13-2002 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by funkmasterfreaky
12-13-2002 6:27 PM


Personal attacks are just a sideshow. Maybe I can try to only respond to the core of the argument. But I doubt it will go anywhere.
Merriam-Webster OnLine ( Dictionary by Merriam-Webster: America's most-trusted online dictionary ) gives the following definitions:
atheist: one who denies the existence of God
agnostic: (1) a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable (2) one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
From A Dictionary of Common Philosophical Terms (Pence, Gregory; McGraw-Hill Publishing, 2000) :
agnostic: one who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existance of God; one for whom the existance of God is a real, continuing, open question. A doubter of God's existance but not as strong as an atheist.
atheist: one who believes God does not exist.
Which of these is most consistent with the opposition here? (And I'm not limiting myself to one participant.) Now if one in particular is an agnostic, why is he so convinced that Christianity is invalid?
[This message has been edited by gene90, 12-13-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-13-2002 6:27 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 12:16 PM gene90 has replied

Chara
Inactive Member


Message 193 of 417 (26543)
12-13-2002 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by John
12-13-2002 6:44 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
It doesn't matter why he does it. For whatever reason god punishes, the act of punishing serves to prod people into servitude. Hence, the claim that it is servitude of your own free will is tainted by the threat of punishment. If you wife slept with another man, would you be mad? Prolly. But if that other man held her at gunpoint? See the difference. God has us at gunpoint.
John, can I take this down to the imperfect human parenthood for a moment - recognizing of course that any illustration, or comparison is going to break down in the details or in personal experience?
There is a verse in Hebrews 12 that says, "For [our earthly fathers] disciplined us for only a short period of time and chastised us as seemed proper and good to them; but HE disciplines us for our certain good, that we may become sharers in His own holiness."
When we don't have a proper earthly picture of this, we can sometimes get a distorted view of what God's punishment is all about. I can vividly remember not enjoying being punished by my earthly father, but one thing I did know, looking back on it is that he always desired the best for me, that he loved me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by John, posted 12-13-2002 6:44 PM John has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by forgiven, posted 12-13-2002 10:12 PM Chara has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 194 of 417 (26547)
12-13-2002 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by gene90
12-13-2002 6:24 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
Good. We've ruled that possibility out.
Coulda been ruled out long ago if you had bothered to read my posts.
quote:
I can only think of two possibilities that remain: (1) Your position is faith-based, just as theism is or (2) for all you know I might be right.
I can think of a third.
(3) My position is based on what information actually exists and not on what information might exist. My arguments rest upon what evidence actually exists, not on what evidence might exist. Your insistence that I must postulate negatives is just silly. Maybe I'll also postulate that there are no invisible aliens pushing down on our heads and thereby simulating gravity. I'd never finish writing the argument because there would always be another negative to postulate.
quote:
If (1) is correct, then you are in no position to ridicule the concept of faith. If (2), you are in no position to rail against my belief system.
If (3) is correct, and it is, then I have no worries.
quote:
That's odd because an agnostic claims to lack enough evidence to discern whether or not there is a God
No kidding? Funny I have been saying this all along.
quote:
hardly one who could honestly rule out any belief system.
So you say. Guess I should have asked permission, eh? "God" does not equate to "belief system"
quote:
Incidentally, I've never encountered anyone who would confess to be an atheist. Even the most violently anti-religious people often claim to be "agnostics". Fundies claim that this is to avoid the social stigmas associated with the title of "atheist".
Incidentally, this matters why?
quote:
A lot of people on this board don't agree with me, but I'm not calling them bigots, because most of them don't call me "stupid", "evil", and "dishonest" simply because of my religion.
Come now Gene, bet you never called them pedophiles either?
Of course you continually gloss over the fact that I have not been disrespectful to you on this board. Whatever I may think of your religion, I have not attacked you for it.
quote:
But if it loses its bite, good. Maybe your arguments will improve.
No need, as your are so bad.
quote:
I see something evil about the KKK but not Christianity.
Glad you finally admit that it does boil down to what gene likes and what gene doesn't like. I do see something profoundly evil in christianity. Oops.... I forgot. Gene doesn't like that sort of talk ( unless it is directed against a Gene-approved target ).
quote:
The KKK has a political mandate, the church does not.
Sorry, but you are not paying attention to the world around you.
quote:
If you hate minorities you join the KKK.
More slander, gene? Couldn't resist one more cheap shot? God tell you I hate minorities, because I damn sure didn't?
quote:
There is some difference there, but you don't see it, and your past comments equating the KKK with Christianity have, as far as I'm concerned, permanently destroyed your credibility.
Wow. Gene asserts that he's right!!!!! Stop the presses.
quote:
What would drive you to hate Christianity so much I will never know, but I think you've shot yourself in the foot with your Klan remarks.
Of course not. You are part of it. Where did you get those blinders? You never said.
quote:
It was justified.
Gimme some a that holy spirit!!!!!!!!
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 6:24 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 11:04 PM John has replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 195 of 417 (26553)
12-13-2002 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by gene90
12-13-2002 1:49 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
You need the Atonement so that your sins may be forgiven (assuming you have developed, ie, earned, faith) and you need the Resurrection so that you may come forth from the grave in the day of Judgement. I'm not implying that you don't need the Saviour.
We do each have a certain amount of tendency toward faith but I believe we can supplement our faith through diligent study, through prayer, by magnifying our callings, and striving to be more Christ-like. This concept is similar to the parable of the ten talents, in Matthew 25. (I am perplexed that all of you disagree because it seems like an axiom to me).
i think you should be careful using the gospels in any discussion of salvation (ducking)... not that the gospel *message* can't be found in them, but that there's a tendency to forget that "Jesus was a jew, sent to the jews" for a reason... the gospel message can and should be understood in the context of paul's writings...
if you believe we can supplement our faith, it isn't a gift... if it isn't a gift, if it isn't by grace alone, it's a work... it can't be partly a work and partly grace, it's all of one or all of the other... if grace, no works... if works, no grace... God gave ALL of us the measure of faith... and we know how much faith it takes, right? very little is needed gene...
it appears you have worked diligently to acquire more faith than i would ever have, since i haven't worked at all... all that i have is God-given... i wouldn't know how to "earn" more faith anyway... God gives what i need as i need it

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 1:49 PM gene90 has not replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 196 of 417 (26554)
12-13-2002 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by gene90
12-13-2002 3:14 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
But that was 2,000 years ago. Is it your opinion that revelation has ended with Jesus' ministry? I'm not contending, only curious.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 12-13-2002]

revelation? i guess i need to know what you mean by that, but my short answer is yes... unless new scripture is written, we have all we need from God... we have his Spirit now to witness to us the truth contained in his word... see gene, if that wasn't the case we might have all kinds of cults and sects sprouting up saying "this is of God" and "that is of God"... wait!! we do, eh? and that's the reason, imho... because many don't accept that God has spoken
that doesn't mean we can't come to more grace and knowledge, merely that the way we come to both is through our maturity in the things he's spoken...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by gene90, posted 12-13-2002 3:14 PM gene90 has not replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 197 of 417 (26555)
12-13-2002 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Chara
12-13-2002 7:20 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Chara:
There is a verse in Hebrews 12 that says, "For [our earthly fathers] disciplined us for only a short period of time and chastised us as seemed proper and good to them; but HE disciplines us for our certain good, that we may become sharers in His own holiness."
When we don't have a proper earthly picture of this, we can sometimes get a distorted view of what God's punishment is all about. I can vividly remember not enjoying being punished by my earthly father, but one thing I did know, looking back on it is that he always desired the best for me, that he loved me.
i agree with this, but i do have a problem with the word "punishment"... i don't believe God punishes us at all, whether saint or sinner... the word "discipline" actually means "to train"... that's what God does... punishment implies judgement, it implies retrobution, it implies vengenance... there will be a time and place for those things, but as far as *I* (personally) am concerned, Jesus was judged, he was punished, God's wrath was poured out on him FOR ME... God will never ever never ever punish me for anything i do, think, or say... he will allow the consequences of those things in my life, but as the means to an end, the training in holiness he knows i need...
not arguing semantics i hope, merely giving my understanding of his word

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Chara, posted 12-13-2002 7:20 PM Chara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-14-2002 7:48 PM forgiven has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3823 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 198 of 417 (26561)
12-13-2002 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by John
12-13-2002 7:34 PM


quote:
(3) My position is based on what information actually exists and not on what information might exist
Really? John claims that his position is based upon evidence. So you're once again claiming that you have positive evidence that there is no God? Or that, at least, my religion is false?
Plus, you haven't gotten over the assumption you are required to make, that there is no God, because you have no evidence as to whether or not there is a God (if you did, you wouldn't be an agnostic, by definition). You have to depend on faith as much, perhaps more, than I do.
quote:
a response to you no less-- that I am technically agnostic. Wanna see?
Agnostics, by definition (two of which I have provided above) do not claim to have evidence either way.
quote:
More slander, gene? Couldn't resist one more cheap shot? God tell you I hate minorities, because I damn sure didn't?
No, that was a rhetorical question. If you like the KKK you wouldn't be comparing Christianity to them, now would you?
[This message has been edited by gene90, 12-13-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by John, posted 12-13-2002 7:34 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by John, posted 12-13-2002 11:36 PM gene90 has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024