My Jesus Challenge

[AV1611VET]

I hardly think that a monk giving his life protesting a corrupt Hitler like regime fits into the same category.

I hardly think he's a martyr, either.

That man needed some serious help.

 

[Zoness]

I hardly think he's a martyr, either.

That man needed some serious help.

People do crazy things when they believe in an afterlife, or in this monk's situation, reincarnation. Nobody can doubt his convictions, I suppose.

 

[dlamberth]

I hardly think he's a martyr, either.

That man needed some serious help.

I feel fairly confident in saying that "if" our President began an active violent purge of Christians in America, so much so that our troupes actually went into churches killing everyone insight, that you would be calling protestors like the Burning Monk in question "martyrs". I know for certain that I would. Because that's exactly what was happening in Vietnam at the time to the Buddhist community.

 

[AV1611VET]

I feel fairly confident in saying that "if" our President began an active violent purge of Christians in America, so much so that our troupes actually went into churches killing everyone insight, that you would be calling protestors like the Burning Monk in question "martyrs". I know for certain that I would.

Dlamberth, do you know the difference between someone being shot for their faith, and a man who sits in traffic and does a FLAME ON! for his faith?

The former was martyred; the latter needed a straight jacket.

Would you want your father or brother or son to do that?

As Zoness said, 'people do crazy things when they believe in an afterlife'.

Others have crazy things done to them.

There's a difference.

 

[dlamberth]

Dlamberth, do you know the difference between someone being shot for their faith, and a man who sits in traffic and does a FLAME ON! for his faith?

The former was martyred; the latter needed a straight jacket.

Would you want your father or brother or son to do that?

As Zoness said, 'people do crazy things when they believe in an afterlife'.

Others have crazy things done to them.

There's a difference.

First, it wasn't just some Buddhist being shot for their faith. The Vietnamese leader was practicing genocide of their religion. It was whole sale killing of Buddhist by the military under directions of their President.

If our government started that kind of campaign against Christians here in America, complete with our Army marching into churches killing everyone, I'm convinced that your attitude would be much different.

 

[AV1611VET]

First, it wasn't just some Buddhist being shot for their faith. The Vietnamese leader was practicing genocide of their religion. It was whole sale killing of Buddhist by the military under directions of their President.

Well that goofball didn't have to help them out, did he?

"Hey! Don't kill us! We're perfectly able to kill ourselves! Watch this! FLAME ON!"

If our government started that kind of campaign against Christians here in America, complete with our Army marching into churches killing everyone, I'm convinced that your attitude would be much different.

And you're about as wrong as wrong could be.

I told my pastor that if America gets to the point that we can't worship freely anymore, I'd like to think that when the time comes, I'd have the nerve to let them shoot me right in the pew where I sit.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Hey hey jane.

Why should i accept these men as authority and accept their theories as the truth?

Are these men your authority?

Could you provide an excerpt that is compelling?

Cheers

Thank you for demonstrating why I didn't bother to do your legwork to begin with. Your only interest lies in denial.
Good to know I can trust my intuition.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Let me speed things up a bit. This is how this whole thing would go down:

1. I indulge you with manifold quotations, peer-reviewed expertise and extensive research.
2. You reply: "Why should I trust fallible men* over what GOD** says?"

*the results of meticulous research conducted by professionals who have devoted their life to figuring these things out and checking that their own work bears scrutiny while also checking that their colleagues haven't jumped to erroneous conclusions.

** A collection of heterogeneous texts attributed to a wide range of people, some of which claimed to include the verbatim words of their deity - not very convincingly.

OR:
2. "Lee Strobel was an atheist, too, and his "Case for Christ" tells a different story.***"
*** The story of a journalist who was well-aware that you cannot build a "case" by only looking at one side of a debate, yet was happy to do just that in his blatant evangelical/fundamentalist propaganda.

 

[the iconoclast]

Thank you for demonstrating why I didn't bother to do your legwork to begin with. Your only interest lies in denial.
Good to know I can trust my intuition.

Hey jane

So in other words you cannot answer those questions?

Why do you choose to ignore my questions?

Cheers

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Hey jane

So in other words you cannot answer those questions?

No, in other words I know *exactly* where you intend to take those questions next, and it doesn't really matter what material I provide, your response will always remain the same.

Why do you choose to ignore my questions?

Cheers

I choose to ignore your questions because they are not genuine questions, but just the setup for the "brilliant" rhetorical move of declaring that fallible men cannot possibly hope to compete with GOD. It's all there in the framing of your questions. I've seen it done a thousand times, it's a routine that never fails to show up with a certain demographic on these forums, and while I've actually gone to great lengths to provide extensive research quotations in the past (more for the benefit of other readers than for the evangelicals who just wanted to go through their usual shpiel), I have little interest to do so this time around. Call it a case of "pearls before swine".
The books are there. Read them if you want to. I can give you more, if you wish. But I have little interest in a non-debate that only focuses on you declaring "Game Over!" after just repeating one tired cliche after the other. It's like playing chess with a pigeon.

 

[the iconoclast]

No, in other words I know *exactly* where you intend to take those questions next, and it doesn't really matter what material I provide, your response will always remain the same.

Hey jane

Well my friend, what is it called when you make a claim on the basis of probability?

Im curious.

Where will my questions lead to next? Where do you believe i intend to go with these questions?

I choose to ignore your questions because they are not genuine questions,

Please excuse me my exquisite gem, that seems unfair.

but just the setup for the "brilliant" rhetorical move of declaring that fallible men cannot possibly hope to compete with GOD. It's all there in the framing of your questions.

How did you get to this conclusion. Do you believe my crux is to point out man cannot contest, rival, or defeat God?

Anyways, i do believe man cannot contest, rival, or defeat God. Do you believe man can?

Lets see if you can guess where im going my dear. Ill give you 3 guesses, please excuse me, your first one was wrong.

but just the setup f
I've seen it done a thousand times, it's a routine that never fails to show up with a certain demographic on these forums,

Wow!!!! That is many times.

and while I've actually gone to great lengths to provide extensive research quotations in the past (more for the benefit of other readers than for the evangelicals who just wanted to go through their usual shpiel), I have little interest to do so this time around. Call it a case of "pearls before swine".

Fair enough. Im ready when you are.

The books are there. Read them if you want to. I can give you more, if you wish.

Well my friend I do not have any desire to read those books but i would love it if we could chat about it. Tell me things which make you believe?

But I have little interest in a non-debate that only focuses on you declaring "Game Over!" after just repeating one tired cliche after the other. It's like playing chess with a pigeon.

I havent declared game over yet or repeated any tired cliches my friend.

Lets start all over again. You can answer all the above questions from this post or just answer the below question.

What benefit is it to you that God does not exist?

Cheers

 

[the iconoclast]

If belief is based on personal communication from/with your deity, then evangelism, faith, and scripture becomes irrelevant.

Hey hey.

Going to be held up for a bit. Ill come back to this soon.

Was he suffering?

Too many ppl. Not enough time. Ill be back.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

What benefit is it to you that God does not exist?

First of all, reality is not about benefits or a lack of the same. If itIf it was an irrefutable truth that this universe is ruled by Cthulhu the evil squid deity, sleeping until He rises to consume us all, then this would be true regardless of whether it spelled bad news for us or not. You literally CANNOT pick and choose what constitutes consensual/objective reality based on personal preference.

So, what do I gain by observing/concluding that there is no personal deity in charge of the universe?
Not much, apart from a chance to better grasp all those gaps in our understanding of reality that were obfuscated by "explaining" them away with God/Magic/the Supernatural. Some Christians like to imagine that people who do not believe in gods simply want to live a life without rules, but nothing could be further from the truth: if anything, life in a godless universe makes morality MUCH more complicated, and places MUCH more responsibility on us. You'd think that having a despotic deity tell you what to eat, how to shave your beard, and how to arrange your household would be difficult - but it's basically a return to the carelessness of childhood, where adult authority figures laid down all the rules and you just had to follow without necessarily understanding why or how they came to be.

So, what do I get out of it? Lots and lots of personal responsibility, the need to really tackle difficult situations, and the disdain of every conservative and authoritarian out there.

 

[Zoness]

Not believing in an afterlife means that life is even more precious and we should be our best in this world. That doesn't mean everyone is or agrees, but it's something that I try to live by. It inform my political worldview and ethics as well.

 

[the iconoclast]

First of all, reality is not about benefits or a lack of the same. If itIf it was an irrefutable truth that this universe is ruled by Cthulhu the evil squid deity, sleeping until He rises to consume us all, then this would be true regardless of whether it spelled bad news for us or not.

Hey hey jane.

That squid sounds scary. So God is not a reality for you.

What would constitute a reality for you? How would God be real to you?

You literally CANNOT pick and choose what constitutes consensual/objective reality based on personal preference.

Do you assume my belief in God is a personal preference?

Would you like to know?

So, what do I gain by observing/concluding that there is no personal deity in charge of the universe?

Not much, apart from a chance to better grasp all those gaps in our understanding of reality that were obfuscated by "explaining" them away with God/Magic/the Supernatural.

Wow you sound like you know something cool. What is an example of a gap in our understanding?

Some Christians like to imagine that people who do not believe in gods simply want to live a life without rules,

Do you assume i think the same way?

but nothing could be further from the truth: if anything, life in a godless universe makes morality MUCH more complicated, and places MUCH more responsibility on us.

How so?

Who are you responsible to and why?

You'd think that having a despotic deity tell you what to eat, how to shave your beard, and how to arrange your household would be difficult -

Are you suggesting the Christian God is a ruler who holds absolute power and typically one who exercises it in a cruel or oppressive way.

If God is not a reality, how do you know that?

but it's basically a return to the carelessness of childhood, where adult authority figures laid down all the rules and you just had to follow without necessarily understanding why or how they came to be.

Well my friend how about Thou shalt not kill. Do you not understand why you shouldnt or how it came to be?

So, what do I get out of it? Lots and lots of personal responsibility, the need to really tackle difficult situations, and the disdain of every conservative and authoritarian out there.

You enjoy having a feeling that the conservative or authoritarian feels you are unworthy of their consideration or respect? Why?

You enjoy being the cause of your own actions?

Are you your own moral authority?

Cheers hey

 

[AV1611VET]

Not believing in an afterlife means that life is even more precious and we should be our best in this world.

No pizza party after the game, kids. It makes the game even more precious, and I want you out there doing your best as a team!

 

[awitch]

No pizza party after the game, kids. It makes the game even more precious, and I want you out there doing your best as a team!

I would hope the players' motivation to play their best isn't a pizza party.

 

[AV1611VET]

I would hope the players' motivation to play their best isn't a pizza party.

"Eat, drink, and be merry; for tomorrow we die."

Is that the philosophy we should live by?

On the other hand ...

1 Corinthians 2:9 But as it is written, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard," nor has it entered into the heart of man, "the things which God has prepared for those who love Him."

No academian* on earth can fathom what God has in store for us.

* I view academians today as pagans who hide behind the scientific method; and whose [subconscious] goal is to obliterate every jot and tittle of the 1611 King James Bible.

They may be the average Joe on the street, or they may have a Ph.D.

One of the common threads that unites them is an adherence to the scientific method as their final authority.

 

[awitch]

"Eat, drink, and be merry; for tomorrow we die."

Is that the philosophy we should live by?

Not necessarily, but no one is saying life should be a free for all. We can't ignore our responsibilities.

* I view academians today as pagans who hide behind the scientific method; and whose [subconscious] goal is to obliterate every jot and tittle of the 1611 King James Bible.

The concept of hiding behind the scientific method is quite amusing because the whole point of using it is empiricism. Anyone can repeat experiments and get the same results. The results are published and reviewed by peers for criticisms. Then they can then be used to make accurate predictions. There's absolutely nothing hiding.

It's scripture that religious people hide behind when they justify their biases. Look through the various threads and you'll find all sorts of varying explanations about everything from different Christians.

One of the common threads that unites them is an adherence to the scientific method as their final authority.

Even the most devout religious people are just fine with science...right up until it no longer parallels whatever their sincerely held religious beliefs happen to be. Convenient, isn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

The concept of hiding behind the scientific method is quite amusing because the whole point of using it is empiricism. Anyone can repeat experiments and get the same results. The results are published and reviewed by peers for criticisms. Then they can then be used to make accurate predictions. There's absolutely nothing hiding.

What I meant was ...

Using the scientific method to sci is one thing, but when they hold it up to the events in the Bible, they're overstepping their authority.

Even the most devout religious people are just fine with science...right up until it no longer parallels whatever their sincerely held religious beliefs happen to be. Convenient, isn't it?

These are the standards I go by:

1. Bible says X, science says X = go with X
2. Bible says X, science says Y = go with X
3. Bible says Ø, science says Y = go with Y
4. Bible says Ø, science says Ø = speculate

If the scientific method is your highest authority, then you should see this set of standards as a form of "blasphemy against nature."

I take a lot of flack from whitecoated* pagans for this.

* I.E., labcoats. (Sheeps' clothing.)