God cannot exist...sue me!

[Davin]

Which is not the same as Abraham having faith that god didn't really want him to kill his son, that part is not in the bible. The god would be lying if he said that Abraham was willing to kill his son but Abraham wasn't really willing to kill his son because he thought the god would stop him.

Neither is the part that God requires us to sacrifice our sons and daughters for salvation.  It was a test to one man which in turn serves as a test to us all.  What are we willing to give up if God is God?  If not everything, then He is not our God.  Again, to fully understand the context of this is to at least understand the basics which *you may not even know since it seems *your knowledge of Christianity is superficial.

Just because I choose to not make assumptions about what the scriptures say doesn't mean that my knowledge of Christianity is superficial. You have no idea of my knowledge of Christianity. And as it turns out, you now admit you were wrong when you stated: "Abraham knew whatever had to be done, he would return with his son." So having not even mastered the story of Abraham well enough to have a coherent and consistent understanding, you claim I have a misunderstanding.

You can assume this all you want, however even if I had never heard or read the myths before, does not discredit my points. You have to address the points made, and not commit an ad hominem fallacy by attacking the person instead.

That is you making shit up and lying. Why are you so dishonest?

If this is making shit up, lying and being dishonest, then prove it wrong and support some of your superficial claims against Christianity with some actual understanding of what these accounts of the past mean, how we should put them into practice, if at all, and/or how it relates to our beliefs and hope.  No one says that to understand it from this context is to believe it.

You're now committing the argument from ignorance fallacy by making a claim and saying that one must provide an alternate explanation to disprove it. Intellectually honest arguments do not work that way, you must provide the evidence for your claims. All claims require evidence even if you're clearly lying.

That makes a lot more sense, but is wrong.

It made the same sense the first time and is not wrong because you would not be here on HAF if there was absolutely no pleasure to gain from it.  At most, it's partially wrong, but not completely.

How do you know this? How do you know my motivations? You're just making shit up again.

Because this god cannot die, you need to explain how this god pretending to die is a sacrifice.

Another point at which you have no understanding and so you make more assertions.  So you dismissing evidence stands quite firm.

So this god is not immortal?

Explain to me the Gospel.

Which one?

The one according to your understanding from scripture.  YOUR interpretation.

My interpretation is that it's just a bunch of stories just like any other mythology and has no empirical evidence to support it so there is no reason to accept it as true.

I shouldn't have to tell you, you're the Christian, you're supposed to tell me. This is just as stupid as me asking you why I'm an atheist.

I'm not here to tell you, and you've not asked me to tell you.

And I'm not here to tell you what you believe and/or what you accept as true. So stop saying, "You tell me" when I ask you a question. I'm not asking you for me to tell myself, unlike your demonstrated assumptions about me, I do not make assumptions about others.

How does this explain how a god that created everything while knowing how everything will be and the choices people will make based on how the god created everything leads to free will.

Who said it all leads to free will?  It's becoming evident you simply don't understand simple concepts.

No one, I asked how it leads to free will, not how everything leads to free will. Not being able to undersatand a simple statement makes your second statement here look humorously ironic.

Essentially all you've said is that the god made everything, knows everything and for no explainable reason, we have free will.

I'm sure you're just as able to point at every single change in evolutionary history to prove exactly how humanity came about.  Explain the gaps to the same satisfaction you're asking here and I'll explain the "for no explainable reason" to you.  Hold your own beliefs up to the same scrutiny as you request me to hold mine.

I don't want "every" explainable reason, but something more than:
1: God knows everything
2: God makes everything
...
~~: Free will

Would be much better.

Just saying something isn't enough, you need to explain it. All you've done is merely assert that there is free will in spite of the god that created everything knows exactly everything everyone will choose. Your mere assertions are the problem with people accepting the concept.

Have you heard some scientists trying to explain evolutionary beliefs?  Much the same as you claim against the Christian belief here.  Much the same.  Assertions that this came to this, then...opps, there's nothing here for a few million years, but then we have this so this is what came of that...and voila...Humans!

I'm not the one claiming something here, the burden of proof is on you, however your example of how you explain evolution is almost as vacuous as your argument for free will.

So the god doesn't know everything because people can choose to do something the god does not know they will do.

Every person is free to choose whatever they themselves see as fit to choose.

...

Can you choose other than what God knows? Yes. You have the ability to choose as you wish. it is YOUR CHOICE.

[AnimatedDirt]

Just because I choose to not make assumptions about what the scriptures say doesn't mean that my knowledge of Christianity is superficial. You have no idea of my knowledge of Christianity. And as it turns out, you now admit you were wrong when you stated: "Abraham knew whatever had to be done, he would return with his son."

Not even close.

So having not even mastered the story of Abraham well enough to have a coherent and consistent understanding, you claim I have a misunderstanding.

Present the full explanation and I'll say you don't have a total misunderstanding.

You can assume this all you want, however even if I had never heard or read the myths before, does not discredit my points. You have to address the points made, and not commit an ad hominem fallacy by attacking the person instead.

No attacks have been made towards you at all.

You're now committing the argument from ignorance fallacy by making a claim and saying that one must provide an alternate explanation to disprove it. Intellectually honest arguments do not work that way, you must provide the evidence for your claims. All claims require evidence even if you're clearly lying.

You seem to be grasping desperately at some "fallacy" again.  I've given the interpretation and some evidence to back it up.
Clearly lying?  Point to the lie.

How do you know this? How do you know my motivations? You're just making shit up again.

State your position and prove me wrong...that there is zero pleasure in your presence here at HAF.

So this god is not immortal?

You tell me.  What have you read and where?

My interpretation is that it's just a bunch of stories just like any other mythology and has no empirical evidence to support it so there is no reason to accept it as true.

Therein lies the perfect evidence to show there is no real idea of what something is that you dismiss.  The Gospel is not a bunch of stories.

And I'm not here to tell you what you believe and/or what you accept as true. So stop saying, "You tell me" when I ask you a question. I'm not asking you for me to tell myself, unlike your demonstrated assumptions about me, I do not make assumptions about others.

Nor am I here to tell you what you believe.  I say, "You tell me..." because you seem to be quite an authority on Christianity and its claims.

No one, I asked how it leads to free will, not how everything leads to free will. Not being able to undersatand a simple statement makes your second statement here look humorously ironic.

And again...nothing lead to free will.  What is to not understand?

I don't want "every" explainable reason, but something more than:
1: God knows everything
2: God makes everything
...
~~: Free will

Would be much better.

It was never put as such.

I'm not the one claiming something here, the burden of proof is on you, however your example of how you explain evolution is almost as vacuous as your argument for free will.

I'm not here to explain evolution.  I never claimed evolution is wrong because...but likewise, it seems the knowledge given on biblical principles is just as vacuous.

[TheJackel]

AnimatedDirt

You run around in circles more than a dog chases it's tail So I am going to cut to the chase here Animated dirt, and see if you agree with the following attribute of your GOD found in the Fount of Knowledge:

St John of Damascus, The Fount of Knowledge:

Abstract 1:

Quote:
"The uncreate, the unoriginate, the immortal, the bound- less, the eternal, the immaterial, the good, the creative, the just, the enlightening, the unchangeable, the passionless, the uncircumscribed, the uncontained, the unlimited, the indefi- nable, the invisible, the inconceivable, the wanting nothing, the having absolute power and authority, the life-giving, the almighty, the infinitely powerful, the sanctifying and com- municating, the containing and sustaining all things, and the providing for all all these and the like He possesses by His nature. They are not received from any other source; on the contrary, it is His nature that communicates all good to His own creatures in accordance with the capacity of each."


Abstract 2:

Quote:
"And yet again, there is His knowing of all things by a simple act of knowing. And there is His distinctly seeing with His divine, all-seeing, and immaterial eye all things at once"

1) Omnipresent
2) Boundless
3) Unlimited
4) Uncontained
5) Omniscient
6) Contains and Sustains all things
7) Is immaterial (made of nothing).

Give me a simple yes or no if you agree to the Christian definition of GOD? When you give me your answer, I will respond.. Ad do keep it to a simple "yes I agree", or "No, I disagree".

[Davin]

Just because I choose to not make assumptions about what the scriptures say doesn't mean that my knowledge of Christianity is superficial. You have no idea of my knowledge of Christianity. And as it turns out, you now admit you were wrong when you stated: "Abraham knew whatever had to be done, he would return with his son."

Not even close.

So which is it: did Abraham know he would return with his son as you said or was Abraham going to sacrifice his son as the god in the bible said?

You can assume this all you want, however even if I had never heard or read the myths before, does not discredit my points. You have to address the points made, and not commit an ad hominem fallacy by attacking the person instead.

No attacks have been made towards you at all.

Just the two most recent:

[...]it seems *your knowledge of Christianity is superficial.

But you have made a decision on the matter without being informed on the whole of the matter.

Instead of dealing with my points, you claimed my knowledge on the subject was limited. This is attacking the man in order to discredit the argument the man is presenting, instead of dealing with the argument the man is presenting. Which is known as the ad hominem fallacy.

You're now committing the argument from ignorance fallacy by making a claim and saying that one must provide an alternate explanation to disprove it. Intellectually honest arguments do not work that way, you must provide the evidence for your claims. All claims require evidence even if you're clearly lying.

You seem to be grasping desperately at some "fallacy" again.  I've given the interpretation and some evidence to back it up.
Clearly lying?  Point to the lie.

I pointed to several lies, but here are some again:

You dismiss that which you care not to delve deeper into and find the core reason you dismiss it. You dismiss the Bible because "God asked a man to sacrifice his son." Full Stop. You dismiss the end of the story, the meaning of it and the reasons why God did it. It's your choice and perogative to disagree, but don't disagree and therefore dismiss the evidence when you've not even searched the evidence. It's like if you're an archaeologist digging for ancient civilizations. You jab the spade into the dirt, uncover more dirt...and move on to another location. You know where to look, you simply have potholed the Bible and so dismissed its claim(s) on superficial knowledge of what says.

Another point at which you have no understanding and so you make more assertions.

Persistence in this says you must gain some sort of pleasure out of it...out of persisting in this, you must gain some sort of pleasure.

[...]it seems the knowledge given on biblical principles is just as vacuous.

These are just plain made up bullshit.

How do you know this? How do you know my motivations? You're just making shit up again.

State your position and prove me wrong...that there is zero pleasure in your presence here at HAF.

I see you changed from gaining some kind of pleasure from this argument, to gaining some kind of pleasure from HAF. Good choice to move the goal post. Is there any fallacy you will not commit?

So this god is not immortal?

You tell me.  What have you read and where?

You said I have no understanding on whether the god can die or not, I was under the impression that the god was immortal.

Because this god cannot die, you need to explain how this god pretending to die is a sacrifice.

Another point at which you have no understanding and so you make more assertions.  So you dismissing evidence stands quite firm.

If the god is immortal, then living for 33 years and getting tortured for a few days won't even register as anything. Getting pricked on the finger with a needle will register more in our lifetime than 33 years will on an infinite timescale. So even if the god were tortured for 33 years, with the immortality, there really is no sacrifice.

My interpretation is that it's just a bunch of stories just like any other mythology and has no empirical evidence to support it so there is no reason to accept it as true.

Therein lies the perfect evidence to show there is no real idea of what something is that you dismiss.  The Gospel is not a bunch of stories.

So there aren't any stories in the bible? What is in the bible then if it's not a bunch of stories?

And I'm not here to tell you what you believe and/or what you accept as true. So stop saying, "You tell me" when I ask you a question. I'm not asking you for me to tell myself, unlike your demonstrated assumptions about me, I do not make assumptions about others.

Nor am I here to tell you what you believe.  I say, "You tell me..." because you seem to be quite an authority on Christianity and its claims.

Only what poeple have claimed Christianity is and what it says in the bible. I've even read the JW bible, the Book of Mormon and the Quran. But since the claims for Christianity are so diverse and different, you need to tell me what your position is. Asking me what your position is, is just stupid.

No one, I asked how it leads to free will, not how everything leads to free will. Not being able to undersatand a simple statement makes your second statement here look humorously ironic.

And again...nothing lead to free will.  What is to not understand?

I don't want "every" explainable reason, but something more than:
1: God knows everything
2: God makes everything
...
~~: Free will

Would be much better.

It was never put as such.

I know, you refuse to provide any kind of detail, yet still insist that you're correct.

I'm not the one claiming something here, the burden of proof is on you, however your example of how you explain evolution is almost as vacuous as your argument for free will.

I'm not here to explain evolution.  I never claimed evolution is wrong because...but likewise, it seems the knowledge given on biblical principles is just as vacuous.

I think if you honestly were neutral on whether I understand the biblical stories, you'd find that this is false, but you have an obvious bias against atheists (as can be seen by your lies about me that I have listed in this post).

[fester30]

It's fun watching two people go back and forth over the whether a man who didn't exist knew that a god who didn't exist didn't actually want him to sacrifice his son who didn't exist.

Then again, you guys aren't really arguing over the Bible and Abraham, or even anything religious.  You are really arguing over who is the more skillful debater.  Not very productive in getting your point across to take time to point out that the person you're debating isn't exactly Plato.

[Stevil]

My point is that if you think your god has demanded something from you that you and/or your society would deem as detrimental or deplorable (e.g. kill a family member) then you need to be really sure that this demand/request has in actual fact come from your god and not some other source and that your god is indeed what you think your god is.

I just remembered something from watching Boston Legal

Exodus 31:15 "For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death"

Here we have a very clear and specific demand from god, a call to action from it's devote worshippers to kill the people who work on Sundays.
I am guessing that Animated Dirt either chooses to ignore this call to action or simply applies an interpretation as to redefine the message so that it is in actuallity not a call to action.

[AnimatedDirt]

Exodus 31:15 "For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death"

Here we have a very clear and specific demand from god, a call to action from it's devote worshippers to kill the people who work on Sundays.
I am guessing that Animated Dirt either chooses to ignore this call to action or simply applies an interpretation as to redefine the message so that it is in actuallity not a call to action.

At one point in biblical history, things were of this nature.  The way I see/interpret this is much the same as raising a child.  At early age, there are directions and consequences to not following directions.  The human race and more specifically, the people God was leading/teaching were "young" and didn't understand everything.  I'm not going to try and rationalize people killed for not keeping the Sabbath in those days other than to say it may've been early judgement.

The NT/Jesus is a "new" covenant (really the old, but simply explained to a more mature follower no longer a "child".) and as Jesus states in one situation, "He with no sin, cast the first stone."  At that point Christ could've cast the stone Himself had He wanted to smite the girl/woman for her sins, but He didn't.  Instead He told her to "Go and sin no more".

In the same vane, anyone that doesn't honor their father and mother is also to be "put to death".  It is to the point that if one of the 10 is broken, then all have been broken and the imperfect dies/put to death.

[Stevil]

In the same vane, anyone that doesn't honor their father and mother is also to be "put to death".  It is to the point that if one of the 10 is broken, then all have been broken and the imperfect dies/put to death.

Welcome back AD, I thought you may have got sick of us (me) putting down the bible.

Wow, seems that we are lucky the human race still exists with all the put to death stuff. I'm glad people don't take it seriously. It is easy to see how extremists go crazy though, in all religions, especially when there are enough of them to do some damage.

[AnimatedDirt]

Welcome back AD, I thought you may have got sick of us (me) putting down the bible.

No, just jury duty kept me away for a couple of weeks.  See here and here.

Wow, seems that we are lucky the human race still exists with all the put to death stuff. I'm glad people don't take it seriously. It is easy to see how extremists go crazy though, in all religions, especially when there are enough of them to do some damage.

It's serious.  While at one time we were "children" and consequences came swiftly, today we are not children and consequences will still come, but more than likely at the end of the day.