• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Dan56

  • Rank
    Exalted Being

Helpful Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Friendly Details

  • Doctrine /Affiliation

Other Details

  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

2,674 profile views
  1. Sufficiency of Scripture

    No, your absolutely right... This is a diversified forum where people are adamant about what they do and don't believe. Nothing wrong with a Christian posting about what they believe. Why anyone would feel insulted by it is beyond my comprehension. If a Christian believes non-believers will go to hell, why in the world would that bother someone who doesn't even believe in hell? Its no different than an Atheist telling a Christian they aren't going to heaven because there isn't any heaven and the book they believe in is nothing more than made-up fables. The preaching goes both directions, slamming what you don't believe is no different than promoting what you do believe. Nothing should be construed as threatening or an attack, especially on a board consisting of multiple beliefs. The trick is to articulate what we believe without force-feeding it onto others.. I suppose the answer to the original thread title is that scriptures are sufficient to those who believe them, but woefully inadequate to those who don't.
  2. Sufficiency of Scripture

    Not being a smart-aleck, but what's the difference? I mean, if a person is incorrect, aren't they wrong? And if a person is wrong, how can they be correct? I'm relatively certain, that's only because they don't believe in eternal damnation .. Some Atheist do mock others for believing in fairy tales, and that's not much better... Just saying, the pendulum often swings both ways. There's an ignore option? I'm surprised I'm not on everyone's ignore list by now
  3. Yes, that's how it works... I guess for some reason, they felt like the 'liker' should remain anonymous? If the liker wants to be known, I reckon they can identify themselves by replying to a post directly with a "good point", "I totally agree", right-on", or .
  4. Sufficiency of Scripture

    Hear! Hear!
  5. Sufficiency of Scripture

    Sometimes people don't believe because they don't like the message, they don't like the God depicted in the bible, they don't understand God's reasoning/judgements, or they don't view God as being righteous or loving.. Belief is a difficult thing when you can't rationalize or relate to a God or his message.. The 'Sufficiency of Scripture' isn't adequate for a lot of people simply because it proves nothing, is nonsensical, and requires blind faith to follow. People accept what they can understand and what makes sense to them, but resist what they can't swallow. Others are more open minded and willing to embrace a belief that touches them in some way. Whatever choice a person makes, there's no need to be apologetic about their decision or opinions.
  6. Absolutely.. I believe morals are derived from our own experiences. We are taught manners, but our own sense of right and wrong essentially emanate and evolve from within ourselves, but of course outside influences can also weigh on our conscience. If you've ever been sick, you can certainly empathize with someone else who's sick, if you've ever suffered, you can develop compassion for others who are suffering. Our moral values are shared experiences, those kids didn't want to punch another kid because it wasn't warranted, and at some time, they undoubtedly had been hurt themselves, so they were opposed to inflicting harm and pain needlessly on another person for no reason.. Morality superseded authority and commonsense took precedence.. We can probably learn a lot from kids.
  7. I imagine the Atheistic reply to that question would be; "Nothing" ... So the follow-up question'; "If you die....what would you want out of death?" becomes irrelevant, because nothing comes out of death, its an end to existence, dust to dust.. Imo, Atheist and Christians don't have a proof based definitive answer to what happens after you die, only Agnostics have logically derived the only correct answer, everything else is belief.
  8. history and faith

    Judaism is just one of the 12 tribes of Israel, the prior periods of time are recorded in the bible. Adam to Noah = 2000 years, roughly 4000 BC to 2000 BC.. Abraham to Christ accounts for the following 2000 years. The bible follows the descendants of Adam (Hebrews- Israelites- Jews). Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Torah), so the time prior to 1500 BC was retrospectively recorded. I reckon that oral tradition transmitted history from one generation to another prior to that.. Nothing is missing.
  9. No, I don't believe I've ever been offended by an unreal or irrational comment.. I guess I just don't get emotional or care about something that I perceive to be untrue.. If I did take a nonsensical statement to heart, that would make me as irrational as the person making the comment.
  10. I actually don't believe Jonathan was offended at all, he just has a lot of disdain towards Christianity. He essentially wrote that he found my comment about the Christian God not accepting nonbelievers to be offensive. But surely he was already aware of that, its common knowledge. If a Muslim told me that Allah spits out Christians, it wouldn't bother me at all, because I don't believe Allah exist in the first place.
  11. I suppose that an instinctive response doesn't always require a choice. If I were at a baseball game and through my peripheral vision saw a ball coming at my head, I'd instinctively duck, no time to consider my predicament and make a decision. But I think with most things, where we can assess a matter, a choice is always available, even if its a choice to remain neutral. I still don't get the insult? My point was that an indecisive person has a choice, even if its not choosing a direction because they don't have enough information to formulate an opinion and pick a direction. Nothing wrong with choosing to remain neutral because of insufficient data.. I often use bible verses to accentuate my point of view, and I felt the one I chose fit the bill. While it may only be applicable to my particular faith, it was not intended to insult anyone. All it meant to me was that God doesn't accept people who are on the fence, they either believe or they don't.. Sorry you were offended by it
  12. If your offended by a bible verse, I can't help that.. Nor do I comprehend how a person can be insulted by something they don't even believe is true? If my opinion is biblical, your real problem is with the bible.. There are 31,103 verses in the bible, buckle-up. I'm just defining choice differently than you.. Wanting to believe your nephew, but choosing not to, is a choice. Your gut feeling about him overrides your desire to believe he's changed, so your decision (choice) is not to believe he's really changed. Having an instinctive response can be the basis of a persons choice too. To me, having faith is a choice, just as not having faith is a choice. You simply hear something and choose to believe or not believe it.. Having faith is not a matter of choice to you because you've chosen not to believe, but having a negative rather than an affirmative reaction to something does not negate choice. What you seem to be saying is something like; I don't want to get married, so marriage isn't a choice for me?
  13. Why Did God Create Athiests?

    I don't believe God did create atheist.. He didn't create Christians either. God created human's, who independently decide the rest for themselves.
  14. True, faith is not obtained via tangible evidence, which is why it boils down to a choice.. I believe because I've chosen to do so. Evidence is not a necessary ingredient in making a choice, we all make choices everyday without knowing the facts. I could also decide not to believe, that is also a choice. My other point was simply that if someone is idle because of indecision, they have not made a choice. They may be waiting or seeking more information prior to making a choice, but in the meantime, they are in that uncertain period of awaiting a resolution, and remain in that intermediate state as their indecision keeps them in limbo. My scenario of being lost in the woods was just to express that a believer and non-believer make a choice, but the indecisive makes no choice and remains idle. But of course, I guess you could define not making a choice as a choice? I just think that indecision is the inability or refusal to make a choice. These are just my opinions of how I look at things, ergo; no reason for anyone to take personal offense.
  15. You seem to be insulted a lot, even when there is nothing to be offended by.. I simply believe in free will, and am convinced that everyone makes choices. If you disagree and feel insulted, then I'd agree that someone is closed minded and intolerant, but it ain't me.