Religion II

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

No "context" excuses such monstrous unjust actions.
Right. My opinions have nothing to do with it. God's actions are what make him unjust.
Ad Hominem!

Interpretation without context is pretext.

It is your personal opinion that God is unjust -- an opinion that originates out of an evil heart (the kind that inheres in all fallen mankind to boot). Of course, you cannot believe God is just because in another of your recent posts, you also OPINED that the Fall of mankind never happened, which of course would make God unjust. But can you prove this? You do have solid, incontrovertible proof, right?

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Interpretation without context is pretext.

Oh, that's catchy. Did you make that up yourself?

Originally Posted by boxcar

It is your personal opinion that God is unjust -- an opinion that originates out of an evil heart (the kind that inheres in all fallen mankind to boot). Of course, you cannot believe God is just because in another of your recent posts, you also OPINED that the Fall of mankind never happened, which of course would make God unjust. But can you prove this? You do have solid, incontrovertible proof, right?

Onus Probandi! Fallacy of Shifting the Burden of Proof.

You are the one making claims, whereas I have previously stated that I am not certain of anything. You are the one that claims that mankind fell and that God is just. The burden of proof is yours.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Oh, that's catchy. Did you make that up yourself?

Onus Probandi! Fallacy of Shifting the Burden of Proof.

You are the one making claims, whereas I have previously stated that I am not certain of anything. You are the one that claims that mankind fell and that God is just. The burden of proof is yours.

No! Go back and read what you said earlier today. You said the fall never happened! Period! That's a far cry from saying, "I'm not sure the Fall occurred." And you are also very certain that God is unjust! You have never said that "I'm uncertain about God's sense of justice." You are very dogmatic in you assertions. Not surprising since theism elevates oneself to the level of a god and self-worship, self-absorption and self-serving excuses and opinions.

I say the Fall of Mankind occurred because the event is logically and coherently consistent with the entire organic story of God's Redemption of Sinners. And all the writers of scripture that allude to or speak directly to the event agree with one another.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

... theism elevates oneself to the level of a god and self-worship, self-absorption and self-serving excuses and opinions.

I did not fix that for you. Go back and check for yourself.

As it stands I do not disagree. (Double negative intended.).

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I read very well, thank you....

Originally Posted by boxcar

Regarding the "red herring", I was just trying to make you feel good about yourself, since you haven't been right about anything. But if you want...I'll take it back. (Just understand, though, that I can't take back my vote for Trump, nor would I want to.)

Again,

It's amusing that your deflection woes continue. If you were half the comprehensive reader (with great understanding of human nature) as you believe yourself to be, you'd realize that using Biblical quotes to make a point - when arguing with someone who does not agree with your assumptions of the Bible - is in your words - self defeating.

It's becoming clear now why you were banished from Christian echo-chamber forums to the far corners of the Internet to spout your brand of drivel. Please spare me any further attempts at making me feel good (which of course is all about trying to make yourself feel good, as if the argument is "winnable"), and please spare me more irrelevant quotes.

We're all still waiting, BTW, for you to answer Actor's question on how you "prove", say in a court of Law, that the Bible is truly a product of divine inspiration. (Note - Biblical quotes are not acceptable proof, for among other things Man had 400 years to get the version of events consistent across all texts in the Good Book prior to release).

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

On the bright side of things, you've induced some people to spend more time reading the Bible.

It's my opinion that Boxcar has driven many more people away from reading the Good Book then encouraged additional readership. Without a doubt, he's driven almost the entire membership of PA away from a potentially interesting thread. Hardly constructive, but then again for him - that may translate to "mission accomplished".

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Unable to cope with his own eventual demise, man created a story whereby he could live forever...and he placed his own version of "God" right in the middle of it. But believing in God does seem to have an obvious advantage. The religious are probably a lot happier in this life than the irreligious are...since they have convinced themselves that they are in line for some sort of post-life "bonus". Expecting a "bonus" is a good thing.

Yes, a bonus afterlife is a good thing, unless of course you're stuck in the midst with humans like Boxcar. His antics make a stronger case for atheism, or at least reincarnation, where you get to come back as a windshield, and Boxcar returns as a bug.

However, it's my opinion that the regular-joe man didn't have much of a hand in creating the Christian story, but that it was whipped up with the purpose of control in mind, and the eternal life aspect of course served two purposes. The first of course allowed for the establishment of institutions that promoted immense suffering of the masses (i.e., The Churches and now the Corporations), and the second was to dangle the ultimate carrot in front of the ignorant ones (with fear of bad, very bad consequences for failure to buy into the narrative).

As you've pointed out, Christianity contains many concepts swiped from other faiths and philosophies (gotta love that Virgin Birth), and in spite of Boxcar's insistence to the contrary, it's not unique with almost any other organized religion with respect to CONTROL.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate

Again,

It's amusing that your deflection woes continue. If you were half the comprehensive reader (with great understanding of human nature) as you believe yourself to be, you'd realize that using Biblical quotes to make a point - when arguing with someone who does not agree with your assumptions of the Bible - is in your words - self defeating.

It's becoming clear now why you were banished from Christian echo-chamber forums to the far corners of the Internet to spout your brand of drivel. Please spare me any further attempts at making me feel good (which of course is all about trying to make yourself feel good, as if the argument is "winnable"), and please spare me more irrelevant quotes.

We're all still waiting, BTW, for you to answer Actor's question on how you "prove", say in a court of Law, that the Bible is truly a product of divine inspiration. (Note - Biblical quotes are not acceptable proof, for among other things Man had 400 years to get the version of events consistent across all texts in the Good Book prior to release).

What's even more amazing is that you apparently came into this world in a woeful state of humor-deprivation. Just thought I'd lay that on you since you don't me to make you feel good.

As far as the "proof" that you're waiting for is concerned, I have discussed in the past in the original Religious thread why I believe the bible is the Word of God. Feel free to knock yourself out to find out.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate

Yes, a bonus afterlife is a good thing, unless of course you're stuck in the midst with humans like Boxcar. His antics make a stronger case for atheism, or at least reincarnation, where you get to come back as a windshield, and Boxcar returns as a bug.

However, it's my opinion that the regular-joe man didn't have much of a hand in creating the Christian story, but that it was whipped up with the purpose of control in mind, and the eternal life aspect of course served two purposes. The first of course allowed for the establishment of institutions that promoted immense suffering of the masses (i.e., The Churches and now the Corporations), and the second was to dangle the ultimate carrot in front of the ignorant ones (with fear of bad, very bad consequences for failure to buy into the narrative).

As you've pointed out, Christianity contains many concepts swiped from other faiths and philosophies (gotta love that Virgin Birth), and in spite of Boxcar's insistence to the contrary, it's not unique with almost any other organized religion with respect to CONTROL.

As usual, you get things backwards. The "many concepts" of "other faiths and philosophies" were actually swiped from the bible which predates those other faiths and philosophies. For example, the kernel promise of the virgin birth is found very early on in scripture in Gen 3:15. And what makes this passage even more remarkable is that the all cultures and societies of the entire ancient world were patriarchal. It would never have entered the mind of any ancient writer to think in terms of the woman's seed (or Eve's more specifically), let alone write about that seed as being the man-child who would ultimately defeat Satan. The ancients would have talked about helicopters before any seed of any woman. Just sayin'....

And, yes, Christianity is quite unique. There is no other Faith on the earth that teaches this, as but one example:

Eph 2:8-10
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
NASB

All world religions, save for biblical Christianity, that believe in a God who judges sinners teach that the path to finding favor with God is by good works -- by strict obedience to him, by keeping his commandments, etc.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

I did not fix that for you. Go back and check for yourself.

As it stands I do not disagree. (Double negative intended.).

Yeah...you got me on that. About time. Even blind squirrels...and you know how the rest goes. But we both know it's atheism that elevates man to the position of a god. And man-worship is older than dirt.

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate

Yes, a bonus afterlife is a good thing, unless of course you're stuck in the midst with humans like Boxcar. His antics make a stronger case for atheism, or at least reincarnation, where you get to come back as a windshield, and Boxcar returns as a bug.

However, it's my opinion that the regular-joe man didn't have much of a hand in creating the Christian story, but that it was whipped up with the purpose of control in mind, and the eternal life aspect of course served two purposes. The first of course allowed for the establishment of institutions that promoted immense suffering of the masses (i.e., The Churches and now the Corporations), and the second was to dangle the ultimate carrot in front of the ignorant ones (with fear of bad, very bad consequences for failure to buy into the narrative).

As you've pointed out, Christianity contains many concepts swiped from other faiths and philosophies (gotta love that Virgin Birth), and in spite of Boxcar's insistence to the contrary, it's not unique with almost any other organized religion with respect to CONTROL.

Sure. "Create" the Christian story in 1st century Judea with the blasphemous idea that God became man to fellow observant Jews, while confident that Nero, Domitian, Trajan, et.al, will watch with amusement for the next 350 years until gaining "control".

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate

As you've pointed out, Christianity contains many concepts swiped from other faiths and philosophies (gotta love that Virgin Birth), and in spite of Boxcar's insistence to the contrary, it's not unique with almost any other organized religion with respect to CONTROL.

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." -- Seneca

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

The "many concepts" of "other faiths and philosophies" were actually swiped from the bible which predates those other faiths and philosophies.

Originally Posted by boxcar

But can you prove this? You do have solid, incontrovertible proof, right?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Actor

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." -- Seneca

And Seneca was a brilliant man who lived from 5 BC to 65 AD. One wonders how he could have avoided mentioning the miracle-working Jesus the Christ, in one of his many philosophical works.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

And Seneca was a brilliant man who lived from 5 BC to 65 AD.

Good to know.