Search results

Because it seems somewhat fairer that way--? Don't call my faith into question.

3rd person as in, assuming a perspective which is external to Christianity.

I'd prefer not to abandon our 3rd person perspective on this issue, but thankyou =)

Aye, I'd agree. I wonder what she's doing to the carbon footprint.

I disagree. It is possible to know one truth, and for it to be the same as another truth, but that they are both known in a different sense. This admits of absolutes, but also of sense - knowing one sense doesn't entail that said absolute is known in another. A different sense would be something...

Good question, we'll rope those in too.

Sup. I see quite a number of people asserting that Christ died on the cross to absolve humanity of their sins; that Christ was killed by God. If we assume even a fairly moderate 3rd person perspective towards Christianity, this seems like something of a paltry evasion, as regards...

Consequently, God is neither 'goodness itself', nor omnibenevolent/omnipotent. Seems to rest on something of a contradiction--?

'Deviation' from a particular line of reasoning doesn't necessarily null its truth value. We can describe Bernie as a homo sapiens or as a human being, because the two terms whilst not being mutually exclusive, are neither co-referential-

No need to be abusive, my most excellent fellow. Given a moderately Nietzschean definition of nihilism; the nihilist believes that the world as it is, ought not to exist. Christians fit this criteria, another might argue, because they accord all value to the afterworld, the kingdom of heaven. As...

Faith is based upon truth? A contradictio in adjecto. If Christianity is unequivocably true, without any hint of dubiety, then there would be no need for 'faith'! Faith is precisely that--trusting oneself that a particular state of affairs holds; will continue to hold.

If God is omnibeneficient then he is not cruel. If God is cruel then he is not omnibeneficient. God's being omnibeneficient/cruel are mutually exclusive propositions--you can't have both.

You seem to suppose that there do not exist different types of nihilist.

Classic example of begging the question

At times I find it hard to swallow back a grimace of contempt. 'Do not place your faith in God, else you may be sent to the Fire'.

That's no problem =) Argument still stands, I guess

It tells much about a person's character; that they are filled with wrath and hellfire for fellow man. A 'beautiful soul', no doubt.

"Characters of blood did they write on the way they went, and their folly taught that truth is proved by blood. But blood is the very worst witness to truth; blood taints the purest teaching, and turns it into delusion and hatred of heart. And when a person goes through fire for his...

Uhm. If God has infallible knowledge, then tomorrow you will engage in activity P. Since God has existed always, and will have been in possession of infallible knowledge, then it follows [roughly] that there is no possible situation whereby tomorrow, you do not engage in activity P.

His omniscience provides a sufficient condition for the elimination of free action ._.