Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Did Muhammad ascend to heaven and descend, Messiah Jesus refutes this.

page: 10
13
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by raiders247



At least with Jesus you won't be dropping anvils on anyone's heads.
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


You are right! Instead we would advocate slavery, incest, genocide and narcissism.

An anvil seems harmless in comparison.


None of that has ever been done by the Church.


I'm a Christian and I have to disagree. "Religion" and the "Church" have killed more people than any other institution in the history of the world.

Genocide: 1492 and beyond. As soon as Europeans found out about the New World, they were interested in two things: Gold and converts. Any who did not submit were given Small Pox laden blankets, run through with a sword, or blown away with the new invention; the Blunderbuss.

Slavery: The Catholic Church was THE most powerful institution in the Western hemisphere at the height of slavery. If they didn't engage in the slave trade themselves, they at least condoned it and allowed it to thrive.

Incest: "Forgive me father, but I have sinned." "No problem Timmy..." Yeah, THAT never happens. I know it's not "incest," but it could be argued that it is worse.

Narcissism: The Pope has a solid gold staff, a crown, and a throne. Meanwhile, children are starving all over the world.

WWJD?

"Religion" has been a bane on mankind since the concept was invented, and I don't care if you're a Jew, Christian, or Muslim. I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and THAT is what counts. Depending on someone else to interpret the Word of God that has been imprinted on your heart by the Holy Spirit is just dumb.

.




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
Its tragic that you don't see what i do within the bible but some people just arn't meant to understand.


Well, I've asked you a bunch of times to cite the evidence that you say is there, and you've yet to show anything that demonstrates you're correct. So I guess either it's only evident to you, or you're not too concerned about the "tragedy" of other people missing out on it.

Which, as I've pointed out before, doesn't make the slightest difference. If you're right, everyone just reboots and gets another go at deciphering the mysteries, but if you're wrong, you've intentionally misrepresented God and tried to turn people against him. Doesn't seem like a winning proposition.


On the other hand i don't post things about people that wern't said as you do either.


Huh? Are you saying that you didn't say that truth was subjective? Or taking back your statement that you wouldn't do something, and God wouldn't, either?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


That is an obvious fact, not a subjective truth...

IF you believe there is only one God, yet another religion says there is many... which is truth?

Obviously both parties have their own truth of the matter...



Then you agree truth is not subjective? Which is it?

And in your example, truth is still absolute, one of those two groups is incorrect, or both. Their beliefs/opinions do not alter truth.

There is no thing as "subjective truth", something that is subjectively true is an opinion.

edit on 18-9-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Well, I've asked you a bunch of times to cite the evidence that you say is there, and you've yet to show anything that demonstrates you're correct. So I guess either it's only evident to you, or you're not too concerned about the "tragedy" of other people missing out on it.


For the sake of being an "entity" on a public forum, i use the word tragedy... It doesn't matter what anyone believes... what matters is how you react to situations life hands you. So its futile to cite verses when you will simply argue them... IF you don't believe the evidence is there, or the notion of reincarnation doesn't ring true to you... so be it.


Which, as I've pointed out before, doesn't make the slightest difference. If you're right, everyone just reboots and gets another go at deciphering the mysteries, but if you're wrong, you've intentionally misrepresented God and tried to turn people against him. Doesn't seem like a winning proposition.


My God will forgive me... And he doesn't punish his children for their mistakes... IF they also forgive their fellow "spirits"

No worries my friend...




Huh? Are you saying that you didn't say that truth was subjective? Or taking back your statement that you wouldn't do something, and God wouldn't, either?


i was refering to another thread... Im still waiting for my quote somewhere on these forums... Something about Christianity and Judaism accepting the idea of reincarnation?




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



Then you agree truth is not subjective? Which is it?


Didn't i say "not all truth is subjective?" Or was that Relative?




And in your example, truth is still absolute, one of those two groups is incorrect, or both. Their beliefs/opinions do not alter truth.


What if there is ONE and Many?


There is no thing as "subjective truth", something that is subjectively true is an opinion.


So is the existance of God an opinion?

edit on 18-9-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
everything you read is a tool that can be absorbed and utilized. to argue whether something is true or false is the epitome of ignorance. whenever anyone speaks, it is truth. to argue over ideologies and play the blame game is completely pointless. however, some people enjoy arguing and in some ways, it is how they find purpose in life. it only becomes a problem when we start killing each other over it.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



Then you agree truth is not subjective? Which is it?


Didn't i say "not all truth is subjective?" Or was that Relative?




And in your example, truth is still absolute, one of those two groups is incorrect, or both. Their beliefs/opinions do not alter truth.


What if there is ONE and Many?


There is no thing as "subjective truth", something that is subjectively true is an opinion.


So is the existance of God an opinion?



There cannot be only one God and many Gods. That violates the Law of Noncontradiction. That's an epic logic fail. Im not being condescending but have you ever had a course in logic or Philosophy? Plato? Socrates? In your example one of the two groups is wrong, or both are. Both cannot be right because their truth claims contradict.

His existence or non-existence would be an objective truth either way, however, my faith in His existence is a subjective belief/opinion.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
how can you refute a claim by quoting a claim by another.
Its like "my religion says your religion is wrong"

ya, everyone heard that million times from millions.
Anything new???



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Huh? Are you saying that you didn't say that truth was subjective? Or taking back your statement that you wouldn't do something, and God wouldn't, either?


i was refering to another thread... Im still waiting for my quote somewhere on these forums... Something about Christianity and Judaism accepting the idea of reincarnation?


If you claim that something is in the Hebrew Bible, then you're claiming that it is accepted doctrine by Jews, because that book is their religion. But where you read reincarnation, everyone else reads resurrection, so my point still stands.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by logical7
how can you refute a claim by quoting a claim by another.
Its like "my religion says your religion is wrong"

ya, everyone heard that million times from millions.
Anything new???


Who are you talking to?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


To anyone with the above mentality, mostly to OP, by the way i am new, so forgive me, i'l learn fast.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by adjensen
 


To anyone with the above mentality, mostly to OP, by the way i am new, so forgive me, i'l learn fast.


Well, welcome to ATS, and yes, it's usually helpful to indicate with the "Quote" or "Reply-To" buttons whom you're addressing.

I would suggest, however, that instead of a knee-jerk reaction to what was posted, you read and consider it. As your chosen name implies, you are a logical person, so you may want to consider the issues at hand from that standpoint. Does the dating of the texts and events that LoneWolf posted in the OP play any role in the argument?

Many people find the Religion ATS forum to be an interesting place to debate and discuss, while some small number who just dismiss it all with a sweeping of their hand generally do not -- they post a few times, get slammed or ignored for it, and either leave or find another forum of interest. Here's hoping that you're the former



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



Then you agree truth is not subjective? Which is it?


Didn't i say "not all truth is subjective?" Or was that Relative?




And in your example, truth is still absolute, one of those two groups is incorrect, or both. Their beliefs/opinions do not alter truth.


What if there is ONE and Many?


There is no thing as "subjective truth", something that is subjectively true is an opinion.


So is the existance of God an opinion?



There cannot be only one God and many Gods. That violates the Law of Noncontradiction. That's an epic logic fail. Im not being condescending but have you ever had a course in logic or Philosophy? Plato? Socrates? In your example one of the two groups is wrong, or both are. Both cannot be right because their truth claims contradict.

His existence or non-existence would be an objective truth either way, however, my faith in His existence is a subjective belief/opinion.


So again, what if both were true...

What if there is one Supreme God,and many lesser "Gods"... perhaps depending on which planet/galaxy/dimention said person exists within?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Akragon

Huh? Are you saying that you didn't say that truth was subjective? Or taking back your statement that you wouldn't do something, and God wouldn't, either?


i was refering to another thread... Im still waiting for my quote somewhere on these forums... Something about Christianity and Judaism accepting the idea of reincarnation?


If you claim that something is in the Hebrew Bible, then you're claiming that it is accepted doctrine by Jews, because that book is their religion. But where you read reincarnation, everyone else reads resurrection, so my point still stands.


In the "Christian" bible, does it not say... You should kill homosexuals? Witches... and other people of different beliefs?

By your logic this would also be accepted doctrine by christian/jewish standards...

Perhaps you're from Westboro? I didn't know they had a Catholic sect honestly...

edit on 18-9-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by adjensen
 


To anyone with the above mentality, mostly to OP, by the way i am new, so forgive me, i'l learn fast.


Welcome to ATS


Have a star... YAY YOUR FIRST ONE!!!




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Akragon

Huh? Are you saying that you didn't say that truth was subjective? Or taking back your statement that you wouldn't do something, and God wouldn't, either?


i was refering to another thread... Im still waiting for my quote somewhere on these forums... Something about Christianity and Judaism accepting the idea of reincarnation?


If you claim that something is in the Hebrew Bible, then you're claiming that it is accepted doctrine by Jews, because that book is their religion. But where you read reincarnation, everyone else reads resurrection, so my point still stands.


In the "Christian" bible, does it not say... You should kill homosexuals? Witches... and other people of different beliefs?

By your logic this would also be accepted doctrine by christian/jewish standards...


For some, I suppose that it is. Christians generally do not live under Jewish Law, though, so you should probably take that up with the Jews.


Perhaps you're from Westboro? I didn't know they had a Catholic sect honestly...


Stooping to personal attacks? Shame on you.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Oh come on now.... you know damn well i was joking...

The point being... Just because some people don't interprete it the same doesn't mean its not there...

edit on 18-9-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by raiders247

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
reply to post by raiders247
 


What's amazing is that you fail to realize your own logical fallacies. Demanding proof of God, and then subsequently shouting at the top of your lungs that you are an atheist, doesn't make you intelligent. It makes you an idiot.

Multiple people here have tried to point out the flaws in your logic, but because you disagree with their beliefs you have rejected their logic outright.

The only logical conclusion for someone opposed to the idea of a creator to come to, is agnosticism. Atheism requires just as much of a stretch of faith as theism does, as neither can currently be "proven".


Wasn't aware one could shout on a message board, but hey that's to be expected by someone who has the ability to believe without proof. You guys never fail to amaze me!


My logic is rock solid: Make a claim, back it up with more than conjecture.

I'm not opposed to the idea of a creator anymore than I'm opposed to martians. I would gladly accept it given there was proof. Agnosticism is just a gateway to becoming an Atheist, I was there once. I refuse to believe in ANYTHING without proof first. And if you looked at your own life you probably don't believe things without evidence either except for when it comes to god, why is that?

The only claim I have made, and all of you continue to ignore this, is that there has yet to be any sufficient non-refutable evidence that a creator exists. If you can prove me wrong I'll eat my words and drown in guilt and repent. But somebody prove it first, please.


-Your first paragraph betrays more than just a poor sense of humor


-Your logic is flawed. You have claimed you are an Atheist, and yet you ridicule theists. I have already pointed out why this is a logical fallacy. Read it again if you don't understand it.

-Agnosticism is not a gateway to atheism. It is an intellectually honest and logical approach to the problem of whether or not God exists. The Theist and Atheist are making equal leaps of faith. The Agnostic at the very least, admits he does not know. As for evidence, How do you know what evidence I have experienced in my life that has supported the idea of a creator? Your idea of evidence is a scientific peer reviewed journal. It's a preposterous idea in the first place. It would be like a colony of ants attempting to write a thesis on astrophysics.

-You are correct in your last statement. There is no *objective* scientific evidence that God exists that will sufficiently convince everyone. There is of course *subjective* evidence, such as irreducible complexity. However, there is also no *objective* scientific evidence that God does NOT exist. That is the point I was trying to make. If you truly consider yourself a logical person, agnosticism is the only reasonable position to arrive at.

Regards,

-DS

PS:

I have seen certain things in my life which have left me no doubt that there is something greater at work in the universe. These things coincided with very specific elements of the Christian faith, and left very little room for argument. None of this will ever be good enough for anyone, and I don't expect them to be (nor am I interested in sharing these very personal experiences with others on a public forum). I suspect that you have had similar experiences (in the sense of SUBJECTIVE evidences) that God does not exist. Neither of us can be proven 100% right at this particular juncture in time. That is why I have said that it is a logical fallacy to conclude an absence of proof is proof of absence.
edit on 18-9-2012 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by adjensen
 


Oh come on now.... you know damn well i was joking...

The point being... Just because some people don't interprete it the same doesn't mean its not there...


What you insinuated is deeply insulting to me, for reasons that I will not go into, and it has no basis in this argument.

And no, the difference between your and my interpretation of scripture isn't a matter of opinion, because opinion which is unsubstantiated by facts is not a valid opinion.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
I have seen certain things in my life which have left me no doubt that there is something greater at work in the universe. These things coincided with very specific elements of the Christian faith, and left very little room for argument. None of this will ever be good enough for anyone, and I don't expect them to be (nor am I interested in sharing these very personal experiences with others on a public forum). I suspect that you have had similar experiences (in the sense of SUBJECTIVE evidences) that God does not exist. Neither of us can be proven 100% right at this particular juncture in time. That is why I have said that it is a logical fallacy to conclude an absence of proof is proof of absence.


Star for you for this paragraph, which I could have written. In my case, it was a period of doubt (or disinterest,) ended by my "conversion moment" (so far as my non-Reformed sense will take that, lol,) and then frequent reinforcement of that presence in my life.





new topics




 
13
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join