02/24/2014 06:47 AMPosted by MaverickI suppose this only validates what I said, in that I will not be able to convince you of my viewpoint. The only way here to show one another's error is when we die or the world ends, one or the other of us will be proved wrong, and the other right. Note that your way gets both of us to the Perfect Earth (the Bible says Heaven is only until the end times, after that the universe will be remade as it was before the fall), while mine only takes me and others who believe the Bible is flawless and the Word of God and obey all its commandments that are not later removed.
02/24/2014 04:36 PMPosted by Engineer^So basically you're saying Satan and Hell doesn't exist supernaturally, but is rather an aspect of human life. Instead of Satan causing sin, the cause is entirely in ourselves. Instead of punishment existing in the afterlife, it is in the world.
Is this a valid restatement?
02/24/2014 06:46 PMPosted by Luftwaffenow I'm not trying to push my agenda here
02/27/2014 09:38 AMPosted by EngineerNote: I'm not an atheist.
02/27/2014 09:38 AMPosted by Engineerhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qJDd-2tM-A
I know what you're response will probably will be to this, "God can do crazy things." Well, why can't I chose anything to be because of God? Why can't I say all of the events in other religious writings are because of God? I'll tell you why. Those other things are wrong. They're not wrong because of this book you read, because YOU are the one that decided that book was right. There's nothing different between it and any other book except logical arguments that YOU make. So how about we start explaining why some crazy things make sense and others don't, please.
Note: I'm not an atheist.
Edit: I'll restate that last sentence: Support anything you believe with logic when possible, and especially in an argument.
02/24/2014 02:39 PMPosted by LuftwaffeSidenote: I'm looking through the older posts and I happened to noticed.... Hylozoist interpreted the bible literally..... For such a smart man he sure does have his foolish moments. He is also a bit too technical at times I must say.
02/28/2014 07:29 PMPosted by Hylozoist02/24/2014 02:39 PMPosted by LuftwaffeSidenote: I'm looking through the older posts and I happened to noticed.... Hylozoist interpreted the bible literally..... For such a smart man he sure does have his foolish moments. He is also a bit too technical at times I must say.
I have yet to see a good definition from anyone about how to identify the parts of the bible supposed to be taken literally and those which aren't. Until someone manages to come up with a satisfying one, the distinction people try to make all boils down to special pleading.
(Also; not a man, but that's a minor quibble!)
02/28/2014 07:33 PMPosted by LuftwaffeOn another note: Identifying the parts of the bible to be taken literally and metaphorically is subject to the human reading it. But that being said when you see the contradiction like the one in the Genesis creation stories you have to atleast think to yourself if it should be taken literally...
02/28/2014 07:35 PMPosted by HylozoistThis is not a sufficient definition
02/28/2014 07:42 PMPosted by LuftwaffeI loved the compassion of Christ
02/28/2014 08:14 PMPosted by Hylozoist02/28/2014 07:42 PMPosted by LuftwaffeI loved the compassion of Christ
This is a widely believed fallacy.
The character of jesus as he was depicted in the bible is really not a very good person for many reasons.
SOME of what's attributed to him is nice, but there's an equal amount which is bad.
This is a good example of a rather complete deconstruction and analysis of the sermon on the mount, with a focus on the really bad parts of it.
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.