JTRizzle wrote:

trubble76 wrote:

JTRizzle wrote:

Made of Stars wrote:This thread has been wikified.



Improvements to the wiki can be discussed here.

The God of Abraham (perhaps the unnamed god of intelligent design, but who knows how He did it) is NOT something that is used to explain a natural phenomena. no explanation of any natural phenomena is necessary in our (Catholicism's) definition of God. if all things about nature were known, there would be no reason whatsoever to disbelieve in God because there is no phenomenon on which He relies. now, many Christians do use God to explain the unexplained, but that has no bearing on what God really is. refer to the Catechism of the Catholic Church for more information on this matter. I think your idea is interesting, it could be a very cool read (if it is not overly biased towards any of the gods or lack of gods) but i think it would be a good idea to either change the criteria or leave the God of Abraham out of it because He does NOT fit the criteria.

I wonder if you are the only believer that thinks their god is different?

I hate to break it to you but your invisible friend is no different to all the other invisible friends. They are all silly little fairy tales, some more amusing than others.

you are incredibly cute.

virphen wrote:

JTRizzle wrote:
as i said, if the man was purposefully insulting you, you have every right to be insulted, but you have no right to insult him. i did not purposefully insult you, i just said your behavior was not reasonable. i have bean unreasonable many times, its not the end of the world. you simply gave me an anecdote, and i told you what i thought about it. it is hard to be convinced that atheists aren't prone to purposefully insulting Christians when every forum i go on, i am purposefully insulted continuously by atheists. now, here's the thing. Christians are every bit as prone to purposefully insulting atheists. they are every bit as wrong as the atheists who insult Christians. my point is that arguments among Christians do not contain nearly the same number of insults as arguments between atheists and Christians. why? because both sides of the argument, when both are Christian, accept that purposefully insulting someone is a sin for which there is no excuse, that the sin damns us, it is only by the grace of God that we are forgiven. we accept these notions, and have no problem pointing it out to each other, so the insults remain at a minimum.

this fact remains: you have no right to feel that a person has insulted you unless they meant to insult you. i do not mean to insult you when i say that you sin. if you are insulted by this, i am sorry, but you should not be because i am not purposefully insulting you.

Once again, all you are doing is talking over me. Your view of what constitutes an insult counts, but mine does not. This is fine for your narrative of nice polite Christians not insulting each other whereas the nasty atheists can't help but be mean, but this narrative is based on ignorance of what we find insulting about how you treat us. You no longer even have the excuse of not realising that you are engaging in this behaviour, because it has been repeatedly and clearly pointed out to you. Your response has not been for a second to take that on board, or to apologise, but to continue to launch your insults and group attacks.

You want a model where you get to fling endless amounts of shit us, but we can't respond. I politely request that you go away and examine your behaviour and remove the insulting elements of your own conduct and assess that of your peers in this light before continuing to insist that atheists are so much more prone to handing out insults.

Fallible wrote:I wonder if he's ever been a member at the Debating Christianity forum. It's by and large a Christian forum, set up by Otseng who is a Christian. There is a rule there of civility. If you're adjudged to have been uncivil you can get dinged for it. Needless to say Christians are constantly getting dinged for getting into heated arguments with other Christians, and the list of banned Christian members is long.

Fallible wrote:What's this? JTRizzle attempting to limit discourse so that he can continue to assert he's right?? Surely not. That's never happened before.

virphen wrote:A Christian continues to insult after being told he is being insulting is deliberately insulting people. So you're committing a sin, by your own omission.

Also, I could add, that if I were to call you a dick, and then say "I'm sorry you're a dick" that wouldn't count as an apology, either. So stop repeating your insults by simply adding the words "sorry" or "I apologise" to them.

Furthermore, the fact that people can think that standing around on street corners threatening them with eternal torture is somehow less bad than telling someone to fuck off, speaks volumes.

JTRizzle wrote:

Fallible wrote:I wonder if he's ever been a member at the Debating Christianity forum. It's by and large a Christian forum, set up by Otseng who is a Christian. There is a rule there of civility. If you're adjudged to have been uncivil you can get dinged for it. Needless to say Christians are constantly getting dinged for getting into heated arguments with other Christians, and the list of banned Christian members is long.

i have never been on that forum but i will check it out. i did not say Christians can't be rude, its just easier for me to convince them that they've been rude.

JTRizzle wrote:

virphen wrote:A Christian continues to insult after being told he is being insulting is deliberately insulting people. So you're committing a sin, by your own omission.

Also, I could add, that if I were to call you a dick, and then say "I'm sorry you're a dick" that wouldn't count as an apology, either. So stop repeating your insults by simply adding the words "sorry" or "I apologise" to them.

Furthermore, the fact that people can think that standing around on street corners threatening them with eternal torture is somehow less bad than telling someone to fuck off, speaks volumes.

i honestly don't know what i said that was insulting to you. perhaps you can let me know so that i can properly explain how i was not being purposefully insulting.

seriously... what insult did i repeat? i honestly have no clue...

do you believe the man was purposefully trying to insult you? is it possible that he felt he was trying to save you, or was too insane to know where he was or that he was even talking to anyone? are you really insulted that some guy on the side of the street cares for you enough to do what he believes may save you from what he thinks is eternal damnation? if the man was purposefully trying to insult you, he was wrong. when you purposefully insulted him, you were wrong.

Clive Durdle wrote:A stage earlier surely, an order by a Tibetan monastery for a computer? Actually, would a smart phone do now?

Fallible wrote:

JTRizzle wrote:

Fallible wrote:I wonder if he's ever been a member at the Debating Christianity forum. It's by and large a Christian forum, set up by Otseng who is a Christian. There is a rule there of civility. If you're adjudged to have been uncivil you can get dinged for it. Needless to say Christians are constantly getting dinged for getting into heated arguments with other Christians, and the list of banned Christian members is long.

i have never been on that forum but i will check it out. i did not say Christians can't be rude, its just easier for me to convince them that they've been rude.

Unsurprising, since they have a history of being easily convinced.

So we have a decision to make: do we believe what an environmentalist group says and choose to live in a world where we’re attempting to make everything as clean in the air as possible, or do we believe what the Bible says, that these things were going to happen and that rather than try to clean up all of the air and solve all of the problems of the world by eliminating factories, we should start to tell people about Jesus Christ who is to return?

virphen wrote:

JTRizzle wrote:

virphen wrote:A Christian continues to insult after being told he is being insulting is deliberately insulting people. So you're committing a sin, by your own omission.

Also, I could add, that if I were to call you a dick, and then say "I'm sorry you're a dick" that wouldn't count as an apology, either. So stop repeating your insults by simply adding the words "sorry" or "I apologise" to them.

Furthermore, the fact that people can think that standing around on street corners threatening them with eternal torture is somehow less bad than telling someone to fuck off, speaks volumes.

i honestly don't know what i said that was insulting to you. perhaps you can let me know so that i can properly explain how i was not being purposefully insulting.

seriously... what insult did i repeat? i honestly have no clue...

do you believe the man was purposefully trying to insult you? is it possible that he felt he was trying to save you, or was too insane to know where he was or that he was even talking to anyone? are you really insulted that some guy on the side of the street cares for you enough to do what he believes may save you from what he thinks is eternal damnation? if the man was purposefully trying to insult you, he was wrong. when you purposefully insulted him, you were wrong.

No, the man was wrong for THREATENING IN PUBLIC me no matter how aware or unaware of how wrong it is, he is. Just like someone removing the clitoris of a baby girl is as wrong as you can get, no matter to what degree he thinks it's right to mutilate baby girls. It just after century on century of being so dominant, xtians still think they have the right to shit over everyone else and not get called on it.

As to insults: personally, you've accused me of sinking down to his level, as if telling someone to fuck off is in any way comparable with threatening them with eternal torture if they don't do what you want. You continue to label atheists negatively as a group. You continue to refuse to acknowledge the offensiveness of much theist behaviour towards atheists, while labelling us as a group more prone to insulting people. I'd really be amazed to find anything I'd ever said could equate to:
- threats of eternal torture
- justification of deity-commanded genocide
- the comparison of the LGBT population to paedophiles and bestialists
- implications that in not believing atheists are somehow less human for not believing in their deity

These are all examples of things that are hauled out by religionists here and in other place on a regularly basis. But we're the rude, insulting ones? Get off the fucking grass.

Fallible wrote:

JTRizzle wrote:

Fallible wrote:I wonder if he's ever been a member at the Debating Christianity forum. It's by and large a Christian forum, set up by Otseng who is a Christian. There is a rule there of civility. If you're adjudged to have been uncivil you can get dinged for it. Needless to say Christians are constantly getting dinged for getting into heated arguments with other Christians, and the list of banned Christian members is long.

i have never been on that forum but i will check it out. i did not say Christians can't be rude, its just easier for me to convince them that they've been rude.

Unsurprising, since they have a history of being easily convinced.

JTRizzle wrote:also, how does God fit the criteria given for this project when God is used only to describe supernatural phenomena, as apposed to describing natural phenomena?

JTRizzle wrote:

Fallible wrote:

JTRizzle wrote:

Fallible wrote:I wonder if he's ever been a member at the Debating Christianity forum. It's by and large a Christian forum, set up by Otseng who is a Christian. There is a rule there of civility. If you're adjudged to have been uncivil you can get dinged for it. Needless to say Christians are constantly getting dinged for getting into heated arguments with other Christians, and the list of banned Christian members is long.

i have never been on that forum but i will check it out. i did not say Christians can't be rude, its just easier for me to convince them that they've been rude.

Unsurprising, since they have a history of being easily convinced.

show me the history of my being easily convinced.

JTRizzle wrote:

virphen wrote:

JTRizzle wrote:

virphen wrote:A Christian continues to insult after being told he is being insulting is deliberately insulting people. So you're committing a sin, by your own omission.

Also, I could add, that if I were to call you a dick, and then say "I'm sorry you're a dick" that wouldn't count as an apology, either. So stop repeating your insults by simply adding the words "sorry" or "I apologise" to them.

Furthermore, the fact that people can think that standing around on street corners threatening them with eternal torture is somehow less bad than telling someone to fuck off, speaks volumes.

i honestly don't know what i said that was insulting to you. perhaps you can let me know so that i can properly explain how i was not being purposefully insulting.

seriously... what insult did i repeat? i honestly have no clue...

do you believe the man was purposefully trying to insult you? is it possible that he felt he was trying to save you, or was too insane to know where he was or that he was even talking to anyone? are you really insulted that some guy on the side of the street cares for you enough to do what he believes may save you from what he thinks is eternal damnation? if the man was purposefully trying to insult you, he was wrong. when you purposefully insulted him, you were wrong.

No, the man was wrong for THREATENING IN PUBLIC me no matter how aware or unaware of how wrong it is, he is. Just like someone removing the clitoris of a baby girl is as wrong as you can get, no matter to what degree he thinks it's right to mutilate baby girls. It just after century on century of being so dominant, xtians still think they have the right to shit over everyone else and not get called on it.

As to insults: personally, you've accused me of sinking down to his level, as if telling someone to fuck off is in any way comparable with threatening them with eternal torture if they don't do what you want. You continue to label atheists negatively as a group. You continue to refuse to acknowledge the offensiveness of much theist behaviour towards atheists, while labelling us as a group more prone to insulting people. I'd really be amazed to find anything I'd ever said could equate to:
- threats of eternal torture
- justification of deity-commanded genocide
- the comparison of the LGBT population to paedophiles and bestialists
- implications that in not believing atheists are somehow less human for not believing in their deity

These are all examples of things that are hauled out by religionists here and in other place on a regularly basis. But we're the rude, insulting ones? Get off the fucking grass.

-the man is not threatening you with hell, he claims God is threatening you with hell.
-did he justify deity-commanded genocide? if so, how is that an insult to you?
-isn't LGBT an acronym for choices of sexual identity?

in that sense, LGBT, heterosexuality, pedophilia and bestiality can be compared.

-what was his implication that you are less human? it seems he is implying that you are MORE human.

my accusation that you sunk down to his level is not an insult. everyone has sunk down to that level at some point. we are not threatening you with hell, we are all threatened with hell.

all people are flawed, so i have labeled all groups negatively, including Christians.

mutilating people is objectively deplorable, disgusting, unreasonable and should be condemned by everyone. we can agree on this. here is my justification for that assumption: it is objectively wrong because the entity which creates objective morality has made it wrong. what is your justification?

also, how does God fit the criteria given for this project when God is used only to describe supernatural phenomena, as apposed to describing natural phenomena?

JTRizzle wrote:
-isn't LGBT an acronym for choices of sexual identity? in that sense, LGBT, heterosexuality, pedophilia and bestiality can be compared.

Diese Präsenz ist leider nicht verfügbar.