Sign in to follow this  
DoctorIssachar

Lessons In Apologetics, Part 1: Introduction & Agnosticism

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Its fine with me if you think piercing a mans hands and feet have nothing to do with crucifixion. If you honestly think it was referring to some other recreational activity, I can't argue with that. And my point wasn't that gambling was thousands of years old, but that a prophecy predicted a specific act where the tormentors of Christ gambled for his cloak.. But I understand that non-believers chalk it off as just one heck of a coincidence, and then continue to ask for evidence?

 

Atheist don't believe in any gods and Agnostics don't believe the existence of God can be known.. There's nothing belittling or complicated about it.. If you think I'm wrong, correct me by stating what you think each of those groups actually believe in regards to God/gods. You guys act insulted, but have no rebuttal, and that silence is confirmation that my definition is correct.

 

Christianity promotes the belief and promise of everlasting life, where no pain or sorrow exist. How you misconstrue that faith into terrorist propaganda is beyond me? And Constantine was a Roman Emperor who wasn't mentioned in the bible. Christians believe in the teachings and life of Christ, not religious leaders or dictators who only seek to empower themselves. 

 

You can say that with a straight face?  After all your belittling?  All your misrepresenting?  

 

:rolleyes:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2018 at 1:13 PM, cuchulain said:

It also promotes a hell, which is the terrorist part we keep referring to.  Just because you ignore thousands of years of terrorist threat doesn't negate it.

 

 

As I previously mentioned, I don't believe the Lake of Fire (hell) is eternal torment, but rather a permanent end of life. The bad rap of hell being some kind of eternal torture chamber comes from radical/wrong biblical interpretations and from literature like Dante's Inferno. And since Atheist don't believe in an afterlife anyway, the belief that life ends when you die shouldn't seem like terrorism?

 

12 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

You seem to forget that we come form an age where distancing oneself from "the church" was a very dangerous activity. These Atheists and Agnostics do not take that lightly, au contraire; they - on average - put in a lot of very complicated research and thought into that (quite a lot more than most "believers" most of the time...). Very often putting hteir own lives indanger (even nowadays in some part of the world) because of religious fanatics. 

 

You insult the whole group by just brushing that of as "not complicated"... but I am not surprised you do not see that.

 

Your now describing the experience, not the complication of being Agnostic or an Atheist. I agree that historically speaking, it could be a complicated position to profess a minority belief that goes against the mainstream consensus. But my previous point was that the definition of an Agnostic or Atheist isn't complicated, not that the repercussions of being one or the other has never been difficult. Point of fact, what Christians believed in the beginning made life very complicated and difficult for them too. 

 

Edited by Dan56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

All your misrepresenting?

 

Again, the accusation that;  "Atheist don't believe in any gods and Agnostics don't believe the existence of God can be known" misrepresents the truth is utter nonsense. If you have a more accurate definition, I'd like to hear it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

As I previously mentioned, I don't believe the Lake of Fire (hell) is eternal torment, but rather a permanent end of life. The bad rap of hell being some kind of eternal torture chamber comes from radical/wrong biblical interpretations and from literature like Dante's Inferno. And since Atheist don't believe in an afterlife anyway, the belief that life ends when you die shouldn't seem like terrorism?

 

 

Your now describing the experience, not the complication of being Agnostic or an Atheist. I agree that historically speaking, it could be a complicated position to profess a minority belief that goes against the mainstream consensus. But my previous point was that the definition of an Agnostic or Atheist isn't complicated, not that the repercussions of being one or the other has never been difficult. Point of fact, what Christians believed in the beginning made life very complicated and difficult for them too. 

 

As has been ignored by you before and again, we are discussing christianity in general, not your very own version that conveniently ignores the rest(vast majority) that claims hell is a real place.  Terrorist threats eminate from christians who believe in a real hell.  Historically catholocism was the preeminent doctrine for a long time that specifically moved this idea along.  Of course, you know your christian history enough to debate it, but i guess cant be bothered to recall the bad points?  Or...cherry pick. 

 

Revelations 21 8...  They will be consigned to the fiery lake of sulpher.  This is the second death.

Psalm 9 17... the wicked go down to the realm of the dead.

Matthew 13 50...and throw them into the blazing furnace...  

 

I opt to stop here, with the understanding that any verse contrary to these is a contradiction which cannot exist innn a perfect book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cuchulain said:

Revelations 21 8...  They will be consigned to the fiery lake of sulpher.  This is the second death.

Psalm 9 17... the wicked go down to the realm of the dead.

Matthew 13 50...and throw them into the blazing furnace...  

 

I opt to stop here, with the understanding that any verse contrary to these is a contradiction which cannot exist innn a perfect book. 

 

To the contrary, the verses you cited solidify my position; being thrown into the Lake of Fire is being permanently assigned to the 'realm of the dead' and is , 'the second death'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

If you do not know how Constantine (having selected which books to add to the bible, which to have rewritten, and which to scrap to serve his own [and his political elite's] purpose)  comes into the picture... well, that actually is history (well documented, researched, and published for peer review).

 

Its inaccurate historical propaganda.. No, Constantine, a fourth century emperor, wasn't born soon enough to have any impact on the writing of the New Testament. The New Testament was written during the first century. The Council of Nicea didn't create or construct a New Testament, but reaffirmed the books that for centuries had already been acknowledged as authoritative by Christians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

To the contrary, the verses you cited solidify my position; being thrown into the Lake of Fire is being permanently assigned to the 'realm of the dead' and is , 'the second death'.

You choose to interpret the lake of fire as something other than what is stated, as a metaphor for non existence? Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

Its inaccurate historical propaganda.. No, Constantine, a fourth century emperor, wasn't born soon enough to have any impact on the writing of the New Testament. The New Testament was written during the first century. The Council of Nicea didn't create or construct a New Testament, but reaffirmed the books that for centuries had already been acknowledged as authoritative by Christians.

 

You mean -- Scripture?

 

:rolleyes:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cuchulain said:

You choose to interpret the lake of fire as something other than what is stated, as a metaphor for non existence? Why?

 

Its not a metaphor per se, but a means of how the body, soul, and spirit are destroyed.. Anything cast into the Lake of Fire is utterly destroyed. The 2nd death is permanent, nothing is left of you, one entrance & no exit. So its not metaphoric, but literally a place of complete annihilation into non-existence,  not even a memory of you survives.

 

3 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

You mean -- Scripture?

 

No, I was referring to the idea that Constantine formulated, rewrote, or chose the books which make up the new testament canon. All of the books put into the canon existed long before Constantine was born, or the time the Council of Nicea convened in 325 AD.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2018 at 4:18 PM, Dan56 said:

 

To the contrary, the verses you cited solidify my position; being thrown into the Lake of Fire is being permanently assigned to the 'realm of the dead' and is , 'the second death'.

In speaking of terrorism, we speak of deliberate fear inflicted on others.  The bible instructs us to be afraid of god...matthew 10 28' fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

God is the one who created hell and casts us there.  So we should fear god, and that is a terroristic threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cuchulain said:

In speaking of terrorism, we speak of deliberate fear inflicted on others.  The bible instructs us to be afraid of god...matthew 10 28' fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

God is the one who created hell and casts us there.  So we should fear god, and that is a terroristic threat.

 

 

While you're at it -- Scripture also isn't big on choice or free will.

 

 

I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cuchulain said:

In speaking of terrorism, we speak of deliberate fear inflicted on others.  The bible instructs us to be afraid of god...matthew 10 28' fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

God is the one who created hell and casts us there.  So we should fear god, and that is a terroristic threat.

 

Think about it.... If you don't believe in God, there's nothing to fear.... And if you do believe in God, there's nothing to fear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

Think about it.... If you don't believe in God, there's nothing to fear.... And if you do believe in God, there's nothing to fear. 

 

 

You are speaking of credibility.  The threat of Hell Fire is not credible.  It is irritating.  My concern is not with the possibility of damnation -- but the attempt at intimidation through an imposed fear of Hell.  A distinction which you pretend not to see.  I have spent much of my life being threatened in this manner.  The threat has not been successful.  It has been annoying.  

 

As to those who do believe in God -- many are clearly acting out of genuine terror.  Your mocking does not disguise the obvious fear in others.  

 

:whist:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you reject God in this life wouldn't God be tyrannical if he didn't respect your wishes in the afterlife and forced you to be with him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Stormbringer said:

 

If you reject God in this life wouldn't God be tyrannical if he didn't respect your wishes in the afterlife and forced you to be with him?

 

Your statement is pure supposition.  We have no objective, verifiable facts about God.  None at all.  What then, are we even discussing?  It is sad enough, when adults have invisible friends.  Invisible enemies is pathetic.  For the rest, I can only reject something that exists.

 

:rolleyes:

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

If you reject God in this life wouldn't God be tyrannical if he didn't respect your wishes in the afterlife and forced you to be with him?

 

We have no objective, verifiable facts about God.  None at all.  What then, are we even discussing?  It is sad enough when adults have invisible friends.  Invisible enemies is pathetic.  

 

:rolleyes:

 

So you are unwilling to answer the question and resort to mockery?

 

Certainly you are able to entertain a mere thought experiment?

Edited by Stormbringer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stormbringer said:

So you are unwilling to answer the question and resort to mockery?

 

What would you like me to say?  If we are speaking in the abstract, of a god, we might have something to discuss.  You're not.  You mean the Bible God.  If this entity were real -- it would be a monster in any context.

 

:whist:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

What would you like me to say?  If we are speaking in the abstract, of a god, we might have something to discuss.  You're not.  You mean the Bible God.  If this entity were real -- it would be a monster in any context.

 

:whist:

Are you willing to entertain the thought experiment?

 

As an Atheist by what objective moral standard do you obtain and maintain the characterization of Monster?

Edited by Stormbringer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Stormbringer said:

Are you willing to entertain the thought experiment?

 

As an Atheist by what objective moral standard do you obtain and maintain the characterization of Monster?

 

 

I read the Book.  Let us count the ways.  Genocide  is not good.  Neither is slavery.  Or Homophobia.  Or Women as property.  Or Sadism.  Or blood lust.

 

:whist:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Stormbringer said:

If you reject God in this life wouldn't God be tyrannical if he didn't respect your wishes in the afterlife and forced you to be with him?

 

That's a good point.... If God were a tyrant, He wouldn't give us a choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this