Why do you think atheists are not Christians?

Status
Not open for further replies.

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If there is any doubt, the first Bibles printed on this continent were funded by Congress, for use in schools, and recommended for reading by the general population. They only funded domestic printing because supply coming from Europe couldn't meet demand. Quite the stretch from how academia paints this particular issue today, and actually has some bearing on the thread title.

Our OP tends to hit hard, and apparently does not wish to (or cannot?) handle plain truth as powerfully as I present it, so I will honor his wish to not annoy him with such. As I unsubscribe I will ask (point out?) how this explores Christianity?

Good to meet you GadFly, don't think I've seen you on CF before?

Ray
Good to meet you too Ray. I appreciate your forthright and honest style. What you have that annoys some people is your respect for sound logic and reasoning. The ones we confront are often more loyal to a political party than to Christ and are rejecting the truth that they do not follow the Christian philosophy of Christ. It angers them to have this pointed out and they defend themselves by saying they are Christian humanist. Now what kind of creature is an atheist Christian?

Any way, I enjoy discussing with these fellows we annoy as it is a contest to see who can teach who the truth. I am convened that we have the best premise in the universe to use in debate and that is why we never loose a debate. We are not smarter than they but we do have the best premise. It is impossible to defeat Christ, is it not? Good hunting brother!
Gadfly.
 
Upvote 0

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Like others have said I don't believe you can pin it down to one particular thing, but in my personal experience with atheist friends of mine one reason almost universally came up. They all were wronged by someone in their church or by the church they attended as a whole.

I know thats not a great reason and it won't apply to all atheist, but in my experience it is the most common reason given.

If you think about it, is there any walk in life where you are safe from getting your feeling damaged? It happens at work, at school, at the country club, with all types of professionals, among friends, and anyplace you go. And of course, there are some that wear their feelings in vulnerable places where they are suspects to be challenged. Yes this happens in church too and of course every Christian is not always as tolerant as others would like.

Some take life's stresses better than others. It is human nature that whenever our feelings are hurt that we think others or other groups are at fault. Atheist are very weak like that because they lack the proper premises for reasoning about their feelings.That is my theory and I am sticking to it, within reason of course.
 
Upvote 0

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What are you talking about? I am not a Christian; never was, never said I was and (as far as I know), never will be. I am an atheist.

In which case your atheistic philosophy just got whitewashed. That's what I was saying because I recognized that you did not speak with conviction or truth and had no solid premise for reasoning. Christians can see those sort of things in atheist. How else would one expect a person to behave that was challenging the greatest premise in the universe to appear. It is not possible for you to appear strong and mighty in light of the greatest premise known to man. That is why I thought you were teasing about being an atheist. Actually, you are not very convincing and I suggest you become a theist. You can not defend well the atheist position IMO.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 19, 2011
14
0
✟126.00
Faith
Christian
Yes, we should not debate politics here but you are the one who raised the political question with your unfair comment about Fox News. This was a very telling comment on your layer side of debate to make your point. You did make your point and I simply noted it.

Well I wouldn't seem it un-fair, an assertion? Yes, but one I felt was more humorous then factual. Although I can still make the case. I also linked you to videos I thought explained it well, so again same idea.


Your layer skills are misleading us here. You support what I said but do not want us to know it. I made it clear that the Constitution did not mention God. It, however, was premised on all those good things mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution is the ruling document and in no way argues against God and state but it does reject church and state. So, you are factually and logically wrong.
All I can say is that "God" and "Church" even in the bible are often said with an analogous attitude. Even with that said God can be in state, I quote Article VI, paragraph 3 "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.". You can be a man of God and be a member of the State. All the constitution prohibits is church and state relationships. There is such a thing as the "Spirit of the Law", and this often refers to the overall idea of the law rather than the words used (as language does change often). So regardless of the word you use for church, the implication is still the same. That of religious ideologies of any kind intermingling with state is to not be allowed.


You do build a premise for your next assertion but your premise is also misleading towards your next assertion. The point I was making is that the God philosophy in government continued into the 50's and not only did we the people state "In God We Trust" on our money but we incorporated it into our pledge to the flag. Not only does the Constitution protect us from church and state but it protects our rights to recognize God in our national philosophy. It also protects us to speak out against philosophies of atheism and humanism such as communism and liberal politics that attempts to separate us from God and our national premise for reasoning about human rights and self evident truths. Do you not see how wrong your premise is? Once God is excluded, which you want to do, the source of our rights is gone. That is really the most dangerous situation I can imagine, a nation without God.

Again, the same idea. No it doesn't protect "God Philosophy". I am not telling you this as my opinion but from a stance of someone whose career it is to know. Red-Herring, I won't go on as that would be pointless, the root is wrong and therefore null and void. *This is the end of this part of the argument as I have explained as best I can the actual legal matter, if you accept it or not is your own choice but you are in-deed factual wrong.

The next point you bring up is it protects you to speak out against other philosophies, and here you are darn right. Although communism has nothing to do with atheism or humanism, there is no logical train of events that leads from atheism to "DIE DIE DIE" (Which is what I think you think communism is, although I may be wrong here.). Also in the forms of communism we have seen (Which are more-so dictatorships over communist countries) many where Catholic. Have you studied the Catholic Church? Most of German Army at the time was Catholic, heck, "God With Us" was engraved into their belt-buckles. But even more so the states made the leader out to be a god, this has nothing to do with atheism or humanism just a looney off-shoot of religion, much like other religions that have gathered of ideas you and I would deem un-reprehensible. God is not the author of our freedoms in the eyes of our government, WE ARE. The society gives rights, we are together a very large collective that decides what to do. In this there is conformation to society expectations and normal and abnormal deviations. Liberal poltics is anything is bringing people closer to God, I believe it was Mark 10:25 that said It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." and guess what the GOP does? Make people RICH, I mean super-rich. Not only that but they want people to own guns, and etc etc etc Would Jesus want you to run around with a gun? When someone punched him he turned the other cheek not shot the dude up. Also to your last point, there are several countries good without God. I believe God gives all the chance to be great upon their own and when people get clouded up thinking what God wants is when they fail the hardest. Look at Sweden, Norway, Japan. All have lower murder rates, abortion rates, STD rates, crime rates, etc etc etc and are OVER 70% atheist. These people are not worried about interpreting Gods word and thusly live without disobeying his will, letting them live how they feel is right.

THIS IS ALSO A QUOTE, FOR SOME REASON IT WILL NOT WORK.
------------------------------------
You do fail to recognize that the communist threat was a world wide and national threat. It did take a fantastic response to halt the march of this evil and liberal march of communism into the world. Eastern Europe serves as evidence of this post World War II danger. The threat was real and the liberal thinkers that said we did not need God still speak this language today. Liberalism was associated with communism in the 60's for good reason. The addition of God has made the world better, which communism and liberalism regards as the operate of the people. I vote we keep God.
----------------------------------------

A great case could be made that Jesus may have supported REAL communism, everyone owns everything, no one starves, no one dies from preventable diseases. Being liberal doesn't make one a communism, and communism was not liberal. Although most liberals do recognize that what was happening in the 40s was not actually communism. So you may think that because of this misconception of what happened back then was actual communism. The response was in many ways great, but the implications were taken far beyond, we were fighting evil, but the source of this evil was not atheism, humanism, communism, or even liberalism. It was evil, a group of evil men making their own cult and calling it a government. It was associated with communism because they understood what it was. Every studied McCarthy? Well you should it is a great view as to why the GOP response was not only sad but unnecessary and harmful. I never said voting AGAINST having God, we all can have God on our own accord. But our government is set up to not deny God, not push him out of our lives, but to be separate of God, to allow all the live their lives how they wish under accordance with laws.

How would inserting the word "humanism" or "liberalism"
make things better? Changing words will make nothing better for we believe our rights to be a minority on issues is protected and come from God and not from the consensus of men. Your logic might be that of a lawyer but it is too liberal for a Christian theologian.

I never said we should. Liberalism doesn't equal humanism or atheism by the way. We should go back to E pluribus Unum (Our original motto) and remove "Under God". As these things, in my professional opinion, are an affront to what this nation was founded upon, and it is my job to recognize such. My logic is that of someone who has a background in law and a vast understanding of world religions, that is all.






Humanism is the default ethics and political strategy of atheism. Your above statement is very similar to the Communist Manifesto. It is the liberal manifesto and the philosophy of humanism is in direct opposition to Christianity, the Nicene Creed, and the philosophy of the CF. You do plainly declare that your world view is anything but the Christian world view which we hold here on the CF. You do tell us that we can make it without God.

I do not say we can make it without God, and please stop speaking for the entirety of CF, speak for yourself. I simply said I think man, given the power endowed by God, can do things of his own will. This is the very premise of free-will. My world view is just that mine, there is no label or potentiality descriptive power behind that.

That was the world issue in the late 20's and 40's when the German people accepted the late superman theory. Faith in humanism has not worked out well in history and it is not working well in world politics today. Why do you guys want to change our national philosophy to an unproven philosophy of life without God? I do reject that what you guys do is an assertive Christian effort. The philosophy of humanism has not made the world a better place to live. Christians are not humanist in the historical sense in that they do not trust in God.You can not logically be both, a Christian and an atheist. You must choose one or the other.

Again what happened in the WW2 was not humanism or atheism, it simply wasn't. It isn't like I just cam in a country founded upon X religion and said "ATHEISM HUMANISM!!!!" when these were brand new ideas. I am coming from the position of this is the way it was founded and this is how it should be. Not only that but you say unproven, like I said before there are countries that are far better than ours without God, this is because God has given us the power to do so and not get muddled up with describing what he thinks. Humanism is simply the belief in ones self to to good. This has made a change, the ability to do acts upon ones own volition has changed everything, I mean look around, a product of humanism. Life extension? Humanism, we want to live longer we place a great deal of importance on that, so we worked on that. I am telling you that I do trust in God, but I know God too. I know that I will do all I can do to be a good person to help those around me and if that is not enough, so be it. I can logically care for myself and my fellow humans (something God wants us to do) and call myself a Christian.

WOW a lot of typing, hopefully someone actually reads all this, anyway. I thought this issue was quite cut and dry as I have a background in the study and understand it from a factual basis. Regardless though, I hope I have at least fixed some of your mis-conceptions.
 
Upvote 0

oi_antz

Opposed to Untruth.
Apr 26, 2010
5,696
277
New Zealand
✟7,997.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Any way, I enjoy discussing with these fellows we annoy as it is a contest to see who can teach who the truth. I am convened that we have the best premise in the universe to use in debate and that is why we never loose a debate. We are not smarter than they but we do have the best premise. It is impossible to defeat Christ, is it not? Good hunting brother!
Gadfly.
Hi GadFly, it is nice to meet you here too. What you say is true, but we must remember that humility, not pride, will win the heart. So although we have the correct premise we also have a wee conundrum as to how to win a war without getting aggressive.

Matthew 10:16
“Look, I am sending you out as sheep among wolves. So be as shrewd as snakes and harmless as doves.

Every time I have spoken against a humble person, my conscience has torn me to pieces. I'm sure you'll get to experience that too if you hang around long enough.
 
Upvote 0

mulimulix

Free Thinker
Apr 20, 2010
391
4
Sydney, Australia
✟8,176.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
In which case your atheistic philosophy just got whitewashed. That's what I was saying because I recognized that you did not speak with conviction or truth and had no solid premise for reasoning. Christians can see those sort of things in atheist. How else would one expect a person to behave that was challenging the greatest premise in the universe to appear. It is not possible for you to appear strong and mighty in light of the greatest premise known to man. That is why I thought you were teasing about being an atheist. Actually, you are not very convincing and I suggest you become a theist. You can not defend well the atheist position IMO.

Where on Earth have I been lacking conviction or truth? My purpose here isn't to debate or try to convince every Christian that they are wrong; I am hear to discuss many religious issues which are prevalent. Who are you to criticise me?

You're very "I'm better than you", "You just got hosed", "I just wiped the floor clean with you", "You fail to do this, you fail to do that"...these are not qualities of a true Christian in any way, shape, or form.

I suggest you work on your arrogance a bit before talking down to people in the way that you do. Nobody will respect your position if you do this.

How I would put it.

Any way, I enjoy discussing with these fellows we annoy as it is a contest to see who can teach who the truth. I am convened that we have the best premise in the universe to use in debate and that is why we never loose a debate. We are not smarter than they but we do have the best premise. It is impossible to defeat Christ, is it not? Good hunting brother!
Gadfly.

"Best premise." This is the kind of thing I would like to debate with you in private.
 
Upvote 0

oi_antz

Opposed to Untruth.
Apr 26, 2010
5,696
277
New Zealand
✟7,997.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
"Best premise." This is the kind of thing I would like to debate with you in private.
I feel that it should be done in public as it is in everyone's best interests to listen and be heard and for the outcome to be preserved.
 
Upvote 0

mulimulix

Free Thinker
Apr 20, 2010
391
4
Sydney, Australia
✟8,176.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
I feel that it should be done in public as it is in everyone's best interests to listen and be heard and for the outcome to be preserved.

I would like to, but I do not particularly want others to join in as it can get too messy with different discussions going on at the same time and whatnot. Do you have another solution? I would like others to see, but would rather others not to reply other than a PM.
 
Upvote 0

oi_antz

Opposed to Untruth.
Apr 26, 2010
5,696
277
New Zealand
✟7,997.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I would like to, but I do not particularly want others to join in as it can get too messy with different discussions going on at the same time and whatnot. Do you have another solution? I would like others to see, but would rather others not to reply other than a PM.
I saw it work over here http://www.christianforums.com/t7531027/ but having said that, I feel that it is not really conducive to growth since what you are really testing is two peoples ability to fight instead of the integrity of the premise being investigated. I would encourage you to keep it open for input from everyone and eventually the matter would either explode and be closed by a mod, or resolved and everyone could shake hands.
 
Upvote 0

mulimulix

Free Thinker
Apr 20, 2010
391
4
Sydney, Australia
✟8,176.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
I saw it work over here http://www.christianforums.com/t7531027/ but having said that, I feel that it is not really conducive to growth since what you are really testing is two peoples ability to fight instead of the integrity of the premise being investigated. I would encourage you to keep it open for input from everyone and eventually the matter would either explode and be closed by a mod, or resolved and everyone could shake hands.

Alright, once GadFly responds to my post, I shall make a thread.

Thanks for the advice. :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

andreha

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 13, 2009
10,416
12,379
52
Gauteng
✟130,569.00
Country
South Africa
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Before anything, I just want to let it be known that I did not come up with this question, it is something I saw asked on another website which I thought was a very good question.

So basically, I would like places to be switched (if you will); to ask Christians why they believe atheists or any non-Christians do not believe in Christianity, rather than asking the atheists (i.e. me) themselves.

I believe that some Atheists don't believe in God because the Christians that they encountered did not show them the love and kindness they deserve, and led them to believe that God is like that also, repelling them away from Christianity.

I believe that a person who is consistently shown hatred, disrespect and judgement will "shield" themselves, in order not to get hurt any further. I believe that a heart that receives love will open up to God's Holy Spirit, and become receptive to His guidance. That's why we Christians are to love our fellow humans, first and foremost. We are to be examples of God's love - for the world to see.
 
Upvote 0

mulimulix

Free Thinker
Apr 20, 2010
391
4
Sydney, Australia
✟8,176.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
If your criticism of me had any meat or substance there would be reason for concern but you only made unfounded and unsupported charges. Notice that I did not praise my own intelligence but I did exalt my premise for everything, which is Christ the logos . Putting me down will gain you know credit or merit since you are still left with your weal secular philosophy. That just galls you guys so baldly that you take your frustrations out on me.

You guys need to learn how the game is played. You state your primes, then you make inferences based on your premises. If you don't do this, we catch you and simply point this out. Your next step is to admit you lost or begin a personal attack to reflect away from the fact you lost. See, I don't care that you think I am arrogant and until you point out how I did not follow my premise, what you say means little to me. Have a good day brother because I intend to rejoices in the fact the I win again. It is difficult to beat Christ, is it not?

Amazing how Christians say atheists are close-minded when there is GadFly here who won't even listen to two people telling him he is being arrogant.

When I am told I am being arrogant (which has happened), I ask them why and I rectify it. How can you just ignore people giving you criticism and shrug it off saying that they (we) are wrong?! This is the epitome of close-mindedness.

Shame on you.

Edit: Disappointing 300th post.
 
Upvote 0

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well I wouldn't seem it un-fair, an assertion? Yes, but one I felt was more humorous then factual. Although I can still make the case. I also linked you to videos I thought explained it well, so again same idea.
Layer friend, evidence after the blunder is not allowed. You know that.

All I can say is that "God" and "Church" even in the bible are often said with an analogous attitude. Even with that said God can be in state, I quote Article VI, paragraph 3 "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.". You can be a man of God and be a member of the State. All the constitution prohibits is church and state relationships. There is such a thing as the "Spirit of the Law", and this often refers to the overall idea of the law rather than the words used (as language does change often). So regardless of the word you use for church, the implication is still the same. That of religious ideologies of any kind intermingling with state is to not be allowed.
I already showed you the error in your logic and you now want to rewrite the case with more opinions that have no substance or words. You can't win a case with imagination that you represent the spirit of the law.Present your case based on facts of law. Your probable is that you are trained to win for your client but the purpose of Christian theology is to find the truth. You are playing the wrong gamehere with your excuses and twisting.

Again, the same idea. No it doesn't protect "God Philosophy". I am not telling you this as my opinion but from a stance of someone whose career it is to know. Red-Herring, I won't go on as that would be pointless, the root is wrong and therefore null and void. *This is the end of this part of the argument as I have explained as best I can the actual legal matter, if you accept it or not is your own choice but you are in-deed factual wrong.
Again, opinion does not count without facts. Where do you think our rights come if not from God? There is no intention in the Constitution to ignore God and to think so defies any common sense whatever.

The next point you bring up is it protects you to speak out against other philosophies, and here you are darn right. Although communism has nothing to do with atheism or humanism, there is no logical train of events that leads from atheism to "DIE DIE DIE" (Which is what I think you think communism is, although I may be wrong here.). Also in the forms of communism we have seen (Which are more-so dictatorships over communist countries) many where Catholic. Have you studied the Catholic Church? Most of German Army at the time was Catholic, heck, "God With Us" was engraved into their belt-buckles. But even more so the states made the leader out to be a god, this has nothing to do with atheism or humanism just a looney off-shoot of religion, much like other religions that have gathered of ideas you and I would deem un-reprehensible. God is not the author of our freedoms in the eyes of our government, WE ARE. The society gives rights, we are together a very large collective that decides what to do. In this there is conformation to society expectations and normal and abnormal deviations. Liberal poltics is anything is bringing people closer to God, I believe it was Mark 10:25 that said It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." and guess what the GOP does? Make people RICH, I mean super-rich. Not only that but they want people to own guns, and etc etc etc Would Jesus want you to run around with a gun? When someone punched him he turned the other cheek not shot the dude up. Also to your last point, there are several countries good without God. I believe God gives all the chance to be great upon their own and when people get clouded up thinking what God wants is when they fail the hardest. Look at Sweden, Norway, Japan. All have lower murder rates, abortion rates, STD rates, crime rates, etc etc etc and are OVER 70% atheist. These people are not worried about interpreting Gods word and thusly live without disobeying his will, letting them live how they feel is right.
Is there an argument here based on facts and premises? We can not allow people to live as they feel. If we did, crazy people like Hitler, Stalin, and other liberals (communist) would rule the world. I have already won the point that society does not give rights. God did that. I ask you again. What is the source of self evident truths? This source of rights and truths is what democracy is founded upon and not the opinions of wavering wants and lust of secular society.


THIS IS ALSO A QUOTE, FOR SOME REASON IT WILL NOT WORK.
------------------------------------
You do fail to recognize that the communist threat was a world wide and national threat. It did take a fantastic response to halt the march of this evil and liberal march of communism into the world. Eastern Europe serves as evidence of this post World War II danger. The threat was real and the liberal thinkers that said we did not need God still speak this language today. Liberalism was associated with communism in the 60's for good reason. The addition of God has made the world better, which communism and liberalism regards as the operate of the people. I vote we keep God.
----------------------------------------

A great case could be made that Jesus may have supported REAL communism, everyone owns everything, no one starves, no one dies from preventable diseases. Being liberal doesn't make one a communism, and communism was not liberal. Although most liberals do recognize that what was happening in the 40s was not actually communism. So you may think that because of this misconception of what happened back then was actual communism. The response was in many ways great, but the implications were taken far beyond, we were fighting evil, but the source of this evil was not atheism, humanism, communism, or even liberalism. It was evil, a group of evil men making their own cult and calling it a government. It was associated with communism because they understood what it was. Every studied McCarthy? Well you should it is a great view as to why the GOP response was not only sad but unnecessary and harmful. I never said voting AGAINST having God, we all can have God on our own accord. But our government is set up to not deny God, not push him out of our lives, but to be separate of God, to allow all the live their lives how they wish under accordance with laws.
You are proving that a case can be made for any crazy idea. But in the court of the truth, the communist lifestyle has not worked and has brought no one to Christ. That is the number one topic on this forum, is it not?

I never said we should. Liberalism doesn't equal humanism or atheism by the way. We should go back to E pluribus Unum (Our original motto) and remove "Under God". As these things, in my professional opinion, are an affront to what this nation was founded upon, and it is my job to recognize such. My logic is that of someone who has a background in law and a vast understanding of world religions, that is all.
My background is training in philosophy and logic. I have noted that you support nothing with a solid premise or fact. "Under God" offends you. That show your true philosophy. We believe you. You are offended by the God philosophy but you admire the philosophies based on the belief there is no God. Why do you as a Christian use your vast knowledge of religion to oppose God? That makes no sense to me at all. But what do I know? My training is in logic

I do not say we can make it without God, and please stop speaking for the entirety of CF, speak for yourself. I simply said I think man, given the power endowed by God, can do things of his own will. This is the very premise of free-will. My world view is just that mine, there is no label or potentiality descriptive power behind that.
Just like the rules in a court room, we are required to follow the rules of the CF. I do speak for myself and I for one and most other CF members can not make it without God. That is why we offer our testimony to society. We oppose your efforts to remove God from our culture.It is untruthful to pretend the Constitution intended to take God out of government. There remains to date that there is not a single word in the Constitution that opposes God but the liberals, atheist, terrorists, humanist, and secular philosophers continue to manufacturer a vernacular vocabulary to support their non premise that there is no God. Your case is therefore, dismissed.

Again what happened in the WW2 was not humanism or atheism, it simply wasn't. It isn't like I just cam in a country founded upon X religion and said "ATHEISM HUMANISM!!!!" when these were brand new ideas. I am coming from the position of this is the way it was founded and this is how it should be. Not only that but you say unproven, like I said before there are countries that are far better than ours without God, this is because God has given us the power to do so and not get muddled up with describing what he thinks. Humanism is simply the belief in ones self to to good. This has made a change, the ability to do acts upon ones own volition has changed everything, I mean look around, a product of humanism. Life extension? Humanism, we want to live longer we place a great deal of importance on that, so we worked on that. I am telling you that I do trust in God, but I know God too. I know that I will do all I can do to be a good person to help those around me and if that is not enough, so be it. I can logically care for myself and my fellow humans (something God wants us to do) and call myself a Christian.
You would not have to spin so much if you would simply state the facts. That is something you note in your next statement which you should know that this is how you loose contol of any jury by continual spin. It tells us that you are not informed about the subject at hand.
WOW a lot of typing, hopefully someone actually reads all this, anyway. I thought this issue was quite cut and dry as I have a background in the study and understand it from a factual basis. Regardless though, I hope I have at least fixed some of your mis-conceptions.

This apology would not be necessary if you would stay on topic. You are correct. Not many people will read this long display of nothing. We are interested in defending the faith in the CF courtroom and not in destroying the foundation of a Christian society. I hope your own words correct your misinformed ideas. In parting, may I ask this question? Have you been born again by the Spirit of God's law?
 
Upvote 0

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hi GadFly, it is nice to meet you here too. What you say is true, but we must remember that humility, not pride, will win the heart. So although we have the correct premise we also have a wee conundrum as to how to win a war without getting aggressive.

Matthew 10:16
“Look, I am sending you out as sheep among wolves. So be as shrewd as snakes and harmless as doves.

Every time I have spoken against a humble person, my conscience has torn me to pieces. I'm sure you'll get to experience that too if you hang around long enough.
Thank you brother for your kind advice. It is true that many think I could eat a little more humble pie but with many people we discuss Christ with, they have no respect at all for our intelligence for having selected the greatest premise in the universe on which to base our arguments and lifestyle. Please note that I often point out that I win debates, not because I am smart, but that I have the best premise, which would be Christ.

As dumb as I am and yet, these guys can not beat me, testifies to the power and wisdom of God. Humility does not work well with those who oppose our premise for everything; therefore, I chose to be bold for Christ. I do understand that not everybody can be a John the Baptist or an Apostle Paul, but God does need some personalities like theirs. Have a nice day brother, and thanks for your concern.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Where on Earth have I been lacking conviction or truth? My purpose here isn't to debate or try to convince every Christian that they are wrong; I am hear to discuss many religious issues which are prevalent. Who are you to criticise me?
I am just an old humble CF member with a better premise for discussion. If that offends you, too dad.
"Best premise." This is the kind of thing I would like to debate with you in private.
If you want to debate premises, you are welcome to any of my threads where we discuss these things and sometimes the debate gets hot. But we try to refrain from personal attacks as it is a type of game we play.
 
Upvote 0

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Amazing how Christians say atheists are close-minded when there is GadFly here who won't even listen to two people telling him he is being arrogant.

When I am told I am being arrogant (which has happened), I ask them why and I rectify it. How can you just ignore people giving you criticism and shrug it off saying that they (we) are wrong?! This is the epitome of close-mindedness.

Shame on you.

Edit: Disappointing 300th post.

I am open minded but you have said nothing about me that had any substance. You are by ethics required to oppose my ideas and not me personally. To disobey this principle is the mark of arrogance. To know what you believe and to defend your belief is not arrogance except in the eyes of those who do not and can not defend their own arguments. That is what I believe and I am sticking to it.

I admit that you guys are smarter than I but I repeat, you guys have the wrong premises and therefore, you look less intercollegiate. If that offends you, just change your premises and then you will feel better about me.
 
Upvote 0

mulimulix

Free Thinker
Apr 20, 2010
391
4
Sydney, Australia
✟8,176.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
I am just an old humble CF member with a better premise for discussion. If that offends you, too dad.

If you want to debate premises, you are welcome to any of my threads where we discuss these things and sometimes the debate gets hot. But we try to refrain from personal attacks as it is a type of game we play.

In case you didn't see, I set up a thread in this forum for that purpose. Please refer to it.

I am open minded but you have said nothing about me that had any substance. You are by ethics required to oppose my ideas and not me personally. To disobey this principle is the mark of arrogance. To know what you believe and to defend your belief is not arrogance except in the eyes of those who do not and can not defend their own arguments. That is what I believe and I am sticking to it.

I admit that you guys are smarter than I but I repeat, you guys have the wrong premises and therefore, you look less intercollegiate. If that offends you, just change your premises and then you will feel better about me.

You obviously aren't open-minded. Anyone here can see that. If someone criticises you for ANYTHING, you should take on board what they are saying and try to improve it. But apparently, you don't think you need to listen to what others are saying...
 
Upvote 0

GadFly

Newbie
May 11, 2008
2,358
82
North Eastern Kentucky
✟18,173.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Ok, GadFly, please check the thread I just created if you would like a discussion/debate.
Good Friend,
I really had no idea that you were frustrated at me. I never did say anything personal about you. I really thought you were playing the devil's advocate. As it turns out, you were serious.

The advice you received from others is good. My purpose in debate is to establish the ontological universe created by Jesus Christ. On the Wesley Parish I do post the philosophy of Christ there and you are welcome to debate or whatever. My purpose will be to show you there is a God, the only reliable and dependable premise for reasoning. This premise has never been defeated and I will be most happy to share this discovery with you. There is no reason for us to be enemies. That is not what I am looking for.

Gadfly
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Jun 19, 2011
14
0
✟126.00
Faith
Christian

It was getting too long. Anyway GadFly, I feel I have presented my case with such accuracy further re-stating is not needed. You have let your pride get in the way and instead of admitting you are wrong you go on with usless and pathetic attempts to contort not only what I say but how I am saying it, such musings are not that of a person with a vast background in philosophy and logic, but that of a mere child playing in the dirt he does not yet understand. Excuse my pretentious nature here, but the simple fact is that I am right, this is not a matter of personal opinion and I refuse to treat it as such. You go on with your ramblings and I try to help you understand only to be met with a closed minded and a closed heart. I pray that you do learn and grow logically and spiritual. I do not mean to be pretentious but people often they are qualified to talk on subjects they are not, like law, physics, and other huge fields. These fields need VAST amounts of education and background, not summer days looking on your computer. It would be different if you were not pride-ful on this and didn't PREDICATE your ENTIRE politically view on this (I honestly think you know you are wrong on this but don't want to admit your entire view is based on a false idea). Then it would be simply misinformed person, but what has gone on is that of a child debating physics with a physicist. No matter how loud the child screams he is till wrong. :)


EDIT: As for the Jesus was a communism and would DEFINITELY in NO WAY be a republican like you seem to think.

"You cannot serve both God and money." -Matthew 6:24 and Luke 16:13

"...it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich
to enter the Kingdom of Heaven." -Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25, Luke 18:25

"...woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort." -Luke 6:24

"Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for ones life does not consist
in the abundence of possessions." -Luke 12:15

"What is highly valued among men is detestable in God's sight." -Luke 16:15

"Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in Heaven." -Luke 18:22, Mark 10:21 and Matthew 19:21
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.