Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Well, in regard to deities, it is a yes/no question. If you don´t answer this question positive, you answer it negative. You might escape having to answer... which is often (falsly) labeled as agnosticism... but you either do believe or you don´t.
So in regard to basketball, I might be a soccer supporter. But in regard to gods, I am a no-godian. (To use Polycarp_fan´s funny label)
I don't remember condoning slavery or murder."They"?
You guys aren't doing it, too?
Thank you --- please don't.
I have been careful to insert the word "today" in enough of my posts that it is clear that I'm talking about two things here:
- You guys here on this Internet --- (and you know who you are) --- the ones who claim the Bible condones murder, genocide, and slavery.
- 2009.
No --- I'm trying to show the danger this planet would face if you guys ran this world the way you guys interpret It.
I'm not interested in the least about what they thought --- I'm interested in what you think.
In my opinion, they thought wrong --- but you guys are thinking just like they were.
Just FYI, the Bible does not say to hang them, or burn them --- again, that's your interpretation --- not mine.
I'll be frank here --- you guys scare the living snot out of me --- you really do.
The way you guys think we Christians should walk, talk, and think, based on how you guys interpret the Bible, it's no wonder we were thrown to the lions.
No --- I'm trying to show the danger this planet would face if you guys ran this world the way you guys interpret It.I'm not interested in the least about what they thought --- I'm interested in what you think.
In my opinion, they thought wrong --- but you guys are thinking just like they were.If you say so.Just FYI, the Bible does not say to hang them, or burn them --- again, that's your interpretation --- not mine.
I'll be frank here --- you guys scare the living snot out of me --- you really do.
The way you guys think we Christians should walk, talk, and think, based on how you guys interpret the Bible, it's no wonder we were thrown to the lions.
"They"?
You guys aren't doing it, too? Thank you --- please don't.
I have been careful to insert the word "today" in enough of my posts that it is clear that I'm talking about two things here:
- You guys here on this Internet --- (and you know who you are) --- the ones who claim the Bible condones murder, genocide, and slavery.
- 2009.
It´s sooo easy.
"People interprete the Bible in a certain way. They are wrong."
"People did interprete the Bible in a certain way. They were also wrong."
"I interprete the Bible in a certain way. I am always correct."
"They"?
You guys aren't doing it, too?Thank you --- please don't.
I have been careful to insert the word "today" in enough of my posts that it is clear that I'm talking about two things here:
- You guys here on this Internet --- (and you know who you are) --- the ones who claim the Bible condones murder, genocide, and slavery.
- 2009.
Then, in your opinion, it was done in spite of the Bible --- wasn't it?
Not if it was murder --- the Bible does not justify murder.
That doesn't explain the 19 women who were hanged.
If you want to include "according to the Bible", then you are going to have to say it wasn't murder, since the Bible does not condone death by homicide.
If you say it wasn't murder, then you have to agree that their exectutions were justified.
If you agree that their executions were justified, then you agree with me that if you ran the world like you interpret the Bible, we would be either slaves, in hiding, or awaiting execution ourselves.
What do you call peace that is required?
Then I rest my case --- if you guys ran the world like you interpret the Bible, we would all either be slaves, hanging on a rope, burning at a stake, or in hiding.
Nice try.
When people distort reality to create 'weak atheism' and 'strong atheism' there must be something missing in their understanding of the English language, don't you think?
Atheist is an absolute, not a relative. It denotes someone who believes that there is no God.
If anyone uses it any other way, then their knowledge of the language is somewhat lacking. It is not my fault that I know what the word actually means, and others do not. Neither does that make me prescriptive in the use of language.
This is just illustrative of the confusion that arises from imprecise use of language. 'Atheist', 'theist' and 'agnostic' are mutually exclusive. If used properly, that is.
A theist does not need to claim 100% certainty. S/he only needs to believe.
In the atheist's mindset, he doesn't believe in A, because A doesn't exist, and never did.So, what are the "proper definitions" of atheism and agnosticism that make them mutually exclusive?
You guys are the evidence in this conversation --- assuming I can get an honest answer from you.
I even created a poll for it.
Some of you guys are smart enough to stay out of the conversation, though.
Stick to read-only if you don't want to be pwned.
In the atheist's mindset, he doesn't believe in A, because A doesn't exist, and never did.
In the agnostic's mindset, he doesn't believe in A, because he hasn't seen enough evidence to warrant believing it.
To put it another way, the atheist says in his heart [and mind], there is no God; whereas the agnostic says in his mind, there [probably] is no God.
Should God actually show up, the agnostic would be surprised, whereas the atheist would be shocked and disappointed.
In my opinion.
Your opinion would be wrong in my case. We'd ALL be shocked, I think, one way or another. i would be delighted. Why on earth would you think anyone would be disappointed?
In the atheist's mindset, he doesn't believe in A, because A doesn't exist, and never did.
In the agnostic's mindset, he doesn't believe in A, because he hasn't seen enough evidence to warrant believing it.
To put it another way, the atheist says in his heart [and mind], there is no God; whereas the agnostic says in his mind, there [probably] is no God.
Should God actually show up, the agnostic would be surprised, whereas the atheist would be shocked and disappointed.
In my opinion.
I have already said I would not interpret The Bible that way, nor ever use it for criminal justice. That does not change the fact that Christians in the past interpreted it just the way you claim we would and created the Hell on Earth you say you fear. And they did it all in the name of God utilizing God's Word as their justification.No --- I'm trying to show the danger this planet would face if you guys ran this world the way you guys interpret It.I'm not interested in the least about what they thought --- I'm interested in what you think.
I agree they were wrong. No, we do not think like they did.In my opinion, they thought wrong --- but you guys are thinking just like they were.
Yes I do. Is it really so hard for you to let go of a false assumption, just because it sounds so good to you? I wonder if that affects your interpretation of scripture as well.... hmmm?If you say so.
That was The Church's interpretation, not mine.Just FYI, the Bible does not say to hang them, or burn them --- again, that's your interpretation --- not mine.
Now you know how we feel about Fundamentalists and Evangelical Christians.I'll be frank here --- you guys scare the living snot out of me --- you really do.
Then how do you explain the accusations against the Bible of supporting genocide, slavery, and incest?No, we do not think like they did.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?