-->
@Theweakeredge
So... you gonna present evidence for a least a morally consistent being? At all?
No, are you gonna present evidence that you’re morally consistent?
Proving god is a lie
Posts
Total:
223
-->
@Tarik
Irrelevant, you claimed:
"God doesn’t need an excuse, He’s God, if anyone’s making excuses it’s you in regards to people and personal responsibility."
That would presume that god has some level of moral consistency that precludes him from defending moral actions. It's not that difficult of a proposition to wrap your head around. If you wanna shift the goalposts, you do that, but I'm not gonna let you drop that, either concede or demonstrate your claims. A claim that's simultaneously a tu quoque and a red herring isn't convincing in the slightest, it just proves even more that you're a dishonest interlocutor.
-->
@Tarik
And do they, as you have done, ask " Why does God have to prevent every evil thing from ever happening to prove He is all loving?"#2
Whether or not they asked the same question I asked is irrelevant, fact of the matter is discovering contradictions in The Bible makes no difference in their regard.
You are the one that asked what about others and their gods, here>>>> " So what do you say to those who believe in a God not depicted in The Bible?" . If you cannot tell me one way or the other, then your question is mute. Because I do not know if or not the followers of the Muslim, or the Pagan or the Jew god claim that their particular god "all loving" as you have done.#2
-->
@Castin
-->@Timid8967So the strawman definition of God is the one you yourself used in the OP. Why use what you consider to be a strawman?
Why indeed?
-->
@Theweakeredge
That would presume that god has some level of moral consistency that precludes him from defending moral actions.
Actually it doesn’t presume that, so if anyone’s shifting the goalposts with irrelevant dishonest claims it’s you.
-->
@Tarik
Um... yes, it does -you specifically stated that god does not need someone to make excuses for him - that presumes necessarily that his moral commands do need justification. Because, and notice here, you said "He doesn't need anyone to make excuses", combined with your position regarding "all-loving" being a quality of that god, and you it is quite obvious that that's what it implies. Regardless, you failed to respond to my earlier question - have you any proof of a morally consistent god? Can you even demonstrate that the character of god presented in the bible is morally consistent?
-->
@Stephen
Because I do not know if or not the followers of the Muslim, or the Pagan or the Jew god claim that their particular god "all loving" as you have done.#2
So for sake of discussion what if they did? Are you gonna go searching for contradictions in their religious texts too? Well I got news for you not all of them have one.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Because, and notice here, you said "He doesn't need anyone to make excuses", combined with your position regarding "all-loving" being a quality of that god, and you it is quite obvious that that's what it implies.
I think I would know what I imply better than you.
Regardless, you failed to respond to my earlier question - have you any proof of a morally consistent god? Can you even demonstrate that the character of god presented in the bible is morally consistent?
I already told you no, are you gonna answer mine
are you gonna present evidence that you’re morally consistent?
-->
@Tarik
Um - if you're talking about what you intend to say sure, but their are logical conclusions you reach from a claim, independent of the intent of the author - that applies here. And again, please qualify why that's relevant - its nothing more than a red herring right now - highlighting your dishonesty.
-->
@Theweakeredge
but their are logical conclusions you reach from a claim
Well the conclusion you’ve reached isn’t logical because it’s false period.
-->
@Tarik
Um.. cool - care to substantiate that? Furthermore, notice who you dropped the other question? Please just admit your dishonesty - actually - how about this - you concede that you were being dishonest, justify said dishonesty in some regard, or.... keep this up and I just won't respond.
-->
@Tarik
Because I do not know if or not the followers of the Muslim, or the Pagan or the Jew god claim that their particular god "all loving" as you have done.#2So for sake of discussion what if they did? Are you gonna go searching for contradictions in their religious texts too?
Why would I? This thread is about the Christian god of the christian bible. If you would like to start a thread on say the Muslim god Allah, I will be glad to join you and discuss your opinions of Muhammad and the Quran.
Well I got news for you not all of them have one.
Have "one" what? It was you that first mentioned an "all loving god", not me. I have said that nowhere do the scriptures claim that god is "all loving" as you appear to be claiming. You pissed in your own cornflakes.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Um.. cool - care to substantiate that?
I wish you started with that instead of leading with the false accusations, that quote was in response to you calling my point about parents once having the free will to not be parents an excuse when it’s not an excuse it’s a fact that has nothing to do with the moral consistency of God.
Furthermore, notice who you dropped the other question?
I didn’t drop anything, last time that I checked no is an answer.
Please just admit your dishonesty - actually - how about this - you concede that you were being dishonest, justify said dishonesty in some regard
I wasn’t being dishonest, falsely accusing one of such is dishonesty in itself and that applies to you.
-->
@Tarik
Um... you: A) Shifted the goalpost, B) Claimed I was doing that after I called you out, C) failed to substantiate your claim (even now), D) Failed to actually prove that there is a morally consistent god, and finally: you've failed to actually prove logically why implication I drew was illogical. Please substantiate that, cause you've failed to do so far.
-->
@Stephen
Why would I? This thread is about the Christian god of the christian bible.
Because that’s what you did in regards to the Christian Bible and it became something more once I mentioned the other religions.
Have "one" what?
A religious text.
It was you that first mentioned an "all loving god", not me.
Actually it was the creator of this forum, I just responded.
as you appear to be claiming.
Although that’s what I believe, I said no such thing in this forum so far.
-->
@Theweakeredge
A) Shifted the goalpost
Prove it because I’m sure I can dispute whatever it is you’re alluding to.
B) Claimed I was doing that after I called you out
You did so guilty as charged.
C) failed to substantiate your claim (even now)
What claim is that, please if you’re gonna accuse me of something please be specific otherwise you shouldn’t even bother.
D) Failed to actually prove that there is a morally consistent god
I can’t fail if I never attempted.
you've failed to actually prove logically why implication I drew was illogical.
Because it was false I already told you why and if all you have to offer to my proof is rejection with no explanation as to why then please feel free to not respond.
-->
@Tarik
Why would I? This thread is about the Christian god of the christian bible.Because that’s what you did in regards to the Christian Bible
YES!!! because you made a claim on a thread concerning the christian god and the christian bible. Don't you understand your own shite? You didn't make that claim about Muslims and the Quran or the others that YOU mention.
and it became something more once I mentioned the other religions.
It became nothing more because you have not shown me that those other followers of the other religions are claiming that their god is "all loving". Only YOU have claimed that about your own god.
Have "one" what?A religious text.
Ok and does their religious text make the same claim the you claim about your own god that he is "all loving"?
It was you that first mentioned an "all loving god", not me.Actually it was the creator of this forum, I just responded.
Nope. It was YOU that has said: " Why does God have to prevent every evil thing from ever happening to prove He is all loving?"#2
So stop trying to palm your shite off onto others. I told , you pissed in your own cornflakes with that comment. The "creator "of this thread didn't mention god being "all loving",
what he clearly wrote was :
"It is suggested that the biblical god is all knowing - all powerful - and all loving", he didn't say that god was "all loving" .#1 Timid8967. Although, there is every chance of him denying writing that at a later date. And he does appear to have moved from all loving to all benevolent.
as you appear to be claiming.Although that’s what I believe, I said no such thing in this forum so far.
But you have. The question - YOUR QUESTION - contains your belief. Otherwise if you didn't believe that god was " all loving" you would have raised the point with the op, as I did with you.
-->
@Stephen
YES!!! because you made a claim on a thread concerning the christian god and the christian bible.
What claim was that?
It became nothing more because you have not shown me that those other followers of the other religions are claiming that their god is "all loving".
I didn’t have to, I said for arguments sake.
Only YOU have claimed that about your own god.
I answered this argument already.
Ok and does their religious text make the same claim the you claim about your own god that he is "all loving"?
You’re not paying attention, I was saying not all religions have a religious text so don’t bother looking for contradictions like you did with The Bible.
he didn't say that god was "all loving" .
I’m not saying he did, referencing WHAT IS SUGGESTED is still mentioning an all loving God regardless of whether or not you agree.
The question - YOUR QUESTION - contains your belief.
True but that doesn’t change the fact that a question and a claim are two different things period.
-->
@fauxlaw
@Timid8967
But it seems that he is quite ready and able to speak on "how Christians think" elsewhere:
Timid8967 wrote:The Christians I have met seem to think that suffering is necessary for them to grow in faith or in character. #143Timid8967 wrote:If they [Christians] agreed with that definition - then they really have little understanding of their god.#47Timid8967 wrote: If Christians think they are being persecuted without good reason, they tend to get all passionate about their Jesus. #47Timid8967 wrote: I have never met a theist who believes just in a three prong god. Most Christians I know reject the three prong approach. #143
He really is a man of contradictions.
-->
@Tarik
The question - YOUR QUESTION - contains your belief.True but that doesn’t change the fact that a question and a claim are two different things period.
The claim was in the question FFS you said " TO PROVE HE IS ALL LOVING". You have furthered that by admitting that YOU BELIVE that your god is "all loving". are you now saying that he is NOT "all loving"? Because you'd be correct as attested to by the bible itself.
Now address have some respect and address the OP .
Can you prove god is a lie or can you prove god is real?
And who has the burden of proof, the theist or the atheist and the "non theist"?
-->
@Tarik
As you have done none of what I suggested, I don't feel its helpful to continue - its clear to me that your semantical dishonest framework, or at the very least, extremely ignorant. I find the latter extremely unlikely.
-->
@Stephen
The claim was in the question FFS you said " TO PROVE HE IS ALL LOVING".
That’s not my claim it’s the OP’s.
You have furthered that by admitting that YOU BELIVE that your god is "all loving". are you now saying that he is NOT "all loving"? Because you'd be correct as attested to by the bible itself.
Unless you have a direct quote of me saying so don’t tell me what I said, because I never said in this thread that The Biblical God was my God.
Now address have some respect and address the OP .
Not that I owe you anything but I already did.
Can you prove god is a lie or can you prove god is real?
It’s not fair to ask me that, just because I’m a believer doesn’t mean I argued in favor of that belief in this thread.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Right back at you.
-->
@Stephen
So what? In fact I embrace contradiction and inconsistencies.
It is not as though I have any reason to be consistent or non-contradictory. I can think what I like and be as preposterous as I wish to be.
You are the one continuing to point out these things as though it means something.
The only measure I need to live by is myself. And I change my position as new evidence or the wind arises.
I like logic and reason - so far as they don't become some kind of absolute - since absolutes do not exist.
-->
@Tarik
Can you prove god is a lie or can you prove god is real?It’s not fair to ask me that, just because I’m a believer doesn’t mean I argued in favor of that belief in this thread.
Then that should have been your response to the OP and not ask him a question instead.
-->
@Timid8967
So what? In fact I embrace contradiction and inconsistencies.
Of course you do - except when those contradictions and inconsistences are someone else's
You are the one continuing to point out these things
I do simply because YOU are continually contradicting YOURSELF!
The only measure I need to live by is myself. And I change my position as new evidence or the wind arises.
OK, So what new evidence has arisen in such a short time for to have giving "us" and "we" what you think or know, or believe about Christians, HERE>>>
Timid8967 wrote:If they [Christians] agreed with that definition - then they really have little understanding of their god.#47Timid8967 wrote: If Christians think they are being persecuted without good reason, they tend to get all passionate about their Jesus. #47Timid8967 wrote: I have never met a theist who believes just in a three prong god. Most Christians I know reject the three prong approach. #143
to now telling us
Then what is it that "we" & "us" atheists and "non theists" should be "taking back"?
The theist runs around the atheist.
The theist will do that at every given chance and particularly if he believes the atheist is BIBLE ignorant. This enables the theists to make shite up as he goes if he is relying on the total bible ignorance of the atheist. That has been happening for millennia, Pastors and Priests have been dictating their version of what they say the gospels, and Jesus and god are telling us and means.
But they don't like being challenged on their version or interpretations , yet here YOU are, telling "us & "we" that we shouldn't be discussing this subject at all by giving it "air time". WHY!!!!???
AND WHILE YOU tell us that you want the bible burned,#8 mock the resurrection #101 tell us that you don't even believe the bible#18 TELL ME PERSONALLY that you "wish" that what I had to say on the subject was "more agreeable with the bible"#25! WHY?
. I just want the truth to be heard.
Which in your own opinion, is what?
And YOU - want to hide the truth behind subterfuge and innuendo.
What is it that you believe that I am hiding?
I say the atheist's truth is better than hiding behind a lie.
Which is what according to you?
You want to hide behind a lie.
What lie would that be?
Well I am one of those who have been let down by your kind of behaviour and talk and wont put up with it anymore.
Instead of telling me what you believe and think about me why don't you start putting your version of "the truth" to us and start answering questions raised by your own comments?
Your generation is DEAD. Or dying at least.
Can you explain that? You appear very annoyed because I have shown you to be a contradictory individual that doesn't seem to know which side of the fence he actually sits .
Us, in the new - have new ways of dealing with these things.
Good! Then deal with them and stop your whining. Start with the "new us" answering those few questions raised by your own comments, here>
WHILE YOU tell us that you want the bible burned,#8 mock the resurrection #101 tell us that you don't even believe the bible#18 TELL ME PERSONALLY that you "wish" that what I had to say on the subject was "more agreeable with the bible"#25! WHY???
Timid8967 wrote:Let us stop playing their games - and prove that god is a nonsense.......But by suggesting that the theist has to make the first move - and that they have the burden of proof, we give up our natural place in things. Let's take it back.
-->
@Stephen
more agreeable with the bibl
Duh! I have answered this on more than one occasion. Just because you don't like my answer does not change the facts.
Not that you care about facts. Stick to the topic - not the person.
And if you can't do that - then well, that proves you are full of hot air and not substance.
-->
@Stephen
Then that should have been your response to the OP and not ask him a question instead.
First of all I can ask anybody anything I want, second the question I asked was relevant to the topic at hand it’s not like I just asked a random question, and last it wouldn’t make sense if that was my response to the OP because the OP didn’t make any direct claims towards me like you did.
-->
@Timid8967
Good! Then deal with them and stop your whining. Start with the "new us" answering those few questions raised by your own comments, here>Duh! I have answered this on more than one occasion. Just because you don't like my answer does not change the facts.
Now you are at the lying stage. You haven't told me why it is that "YOU WISH" that I was more agreeable with the bible that you don't even believe in?
Once again you have shown your contradictions and hypocrisy. You haven't even explained to "us" what it is that you believe "we" should be "taking back"?
Why do you believe it is up to the atheist and to you - the pretend non theist to prove that god doesn't exists?
"we" again! I have never met anyone that doesn't believe in god that feels he has to rationalises why he doesn't believe.
Ok so why don't you explain how YOU try to rationalise YOUR rejection of god and why you believe that you have to rationalise your own beliefs of his non existence?
I don't think we should use strawman arguments - why? Because we have the truth - and the truth will win.#20 Timid8967
Great. Now just explain which "truth"you are talking about? The "truth"that god does not exist? Or the truth that theists cannot prove that god exists?
And here is you telling the "us and the "we" that it is "us" and "we" that :
We need to start being proactive. We need to take the bull by the horns. We need to give ourselves the b.o.p. to prove that God exists. Why? Because we have the truth. #20 Timid8967
That is YOU clear as day telling us the atheist and the non theist the "we" should take the burden of proof on our shoulders.
WHY ?
We need to be smarter - we need to take back control - we need to walk first - speak first - take on the presumptions - and write the rules ourselves. #20 Timid8967
What control do you think "we" have lost to have to take it back? And what rules are you talking about?
But by suggesting that the theist has to make the first move - and that they have the burden of proof,
But you say YOURSELF that the theist has the burden of proof; Here ;
Let me be clear. Theists have the burden of proof. I cannot recall ever saying otherwise.............#61
And where is our natural place? And how and when did we give it up?
for the billionth time, take what back?
-->
@Stephen
If and when I want to talk about what I believe is a matter for me. I don't believe in god and I certainly don't believe I owe you any explanation over and above what I have already given. Stop harassing me. Talk about the subject. Don't ask me to have to repeat myself. I won't.