God is responsible for all the bad stuff that happens

[Mare Tranquillity]

Except it makes use of the word 'like' -- hence 'responding to your posts feels like having a severe case of constipation'.

Yeah, but you wouldn't know what severe constipation was unless you'd had it, so my advice was given just in case. It was a gift, no charge, don't like? Don't use it.

Its right there in most ontological arguments.

Arguments are not proof.

But I have provided an argument -- ontology.

Posting the word "ontology" over and over again does not constitute proof of the souls existence.

Now I see why you can't understand. ONTOLOGY IS NOT A SCIENCE.

A science or a study is the way it's defined, studying something doesn't make it real, doesn't provide proof.

Nonesense. I'm only presenting your absurd argument to you so that you can step back a little and objectively judge it.

Since I never said that I begin to see why you are incapable of responding reasonably to what I write: you don't read what I write. All I can do is assume that you make up what you wish I had written so that you can respond in the way you would like to respond. If you are going to accuse me of writing something perhaps you should post my quote and tell where you got it. Duh?

I'm a NOMINAL catholic. I don't claim anything beyond that.

For a nominal Catholic you sure have been a faithful apologist for the Pope and his endless riches.

That is the consequence of YOUR interpretation of the commandment of love without facts, logic and context -- that you love someone simply by being infatuated with his a$$.

Once again you lie about me because you have nothing to say. You lie about what I say, you lie about my sex life, and you denigrate my intelligence. I suspect you feel pretty threatened by me to have to resort to that kind of repetitive character assassination.

If LOVE GOD and LOVE OTHERS AS YOURSELF are the two most important commandments in the Bible, then all other scriptures and all of the Pope's windbaggery should be judged against them. You don't like it, but there it is in your holy book by your Savior.

 

[Dr.Who]

How much of a sacrifice was it then, if it was only a "temporary" death? Upon resurrection, there was no sacrifice of "his only begotten son", or of "himself". To a mortal human, death is forever, for a God...just a temporary situation. Back to the original question: What was the big sacrifice?

On the day you first sinned you died the first death and your spirit was separated from the love of God. The spirit dies but does not end so you too when your body decays (the second death) will not be gone. Death even for the unsaved is not an eternity of non-existence.

And regarding the first death: that is temporary if you/your spirit comes again into communion with God. it is only permanent if you never reconcile.

The second physical death is only a result of the first death and serves to demonstrate for you that you are indeed spiritually dead.

So just like the people Jesus came to save, died and will again be reunited with God, Jesus died and was later alive again. His physical death too is a model that serves to show you a spiritual truth.

Perhaps experiencing the torture and pain (and perhaps even being aware of a separation from God the Father) is not so bad in cosmic terms. Or perhaps it is. But it still was a substitute for the death you owed. It still allows you to be spiritually alive again if you have faith. I don't know about you but I don't care if the sacrifice was great or small I am just grateful to be the recipient of the grace.

 

[Dr.Who]

So you have had to retreat to Nums line and simply attack me by calling me "nuts" and when I ask you to go word by word and prove that what I'm posting is NOT what's in the Bible you run and hide.

HELLO! I said that your opinions were nuts - and they are.

You really have to learn something about the boundaries between a person and what a person thinks, between and agenda and who a person is, between the bible and the interpretations that are based on it, etc.

Then you go one step further and call me a liar without any proof whatsoever. I said that I would not pass laws that take rights from others that I claim for my own as Christians have done in direct contravention to the commandment of Jesus--and the best you can do is call me a liar.

Wrong again. I did not call you a liar.

I said that you would pass laws too if you could. Would you not pass a law making marriage more than just between a man and a woman?

 

[Dr.Who]

and when I ask you to go word by word and prove that what I'm posting is NOT what's in the Bible you run and hide.

I have countered the crazy things you say about the bible many times clearly and succinctly.

If I missed one just start a thread and I will follow your link to it.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

HELLO! I said that your opinions were nuts - and they are. You really have to learn something about the boundaries between a person and what a person thinks, between and agenda and who a person is, between the bible and the interpretations that are based on it, etc.

And yet, when given the opportunity to show me that I am wrong word by word and phrase by phrase you bail out. You admit that I am quoting the Bible correctly, but it's just that I'm not "interpreting" it to suit you. Why does God speak so vaguely that people have to interpret His words? Maybe He doesn't, maybe you just don't want to accept LOVE OTHERS AS YOURSELF, maybe it's too difficult and you have to go back to hurting others in God's name in an attempt to make yourself feel more righteoous.

Wrong again. I did not call you a liar. I said that you would pass laws too if you could. Would you not pass a law making marriage more than just between a man and a woman?

I said that I would never do as you have done and pass laws that took from you what I claim for my own. I would not persecute you as you have done to us.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I have countered the crazy things you say about the bible many times clearly and succinctly.

If I missed one just start a thread and I will follow your link to it.

I asked about Jesus' two most important commandments and Nums went off into a tirade about sex, so what about you? If these are the two most important commandments in the whole Bible, do you use them to measure all other scriptures against? And if you do, then how can you willfully participate in the persecution of gay people?

 

[top gun]

First of all, your "proof" is not really a proof.

Of course, god is infinite, in the sense that god has always existed and always will exist. You and I are also infinite in the same sense, as we existed as spirits before coming to Earth, and will once again exist as spirits after we leave it.

You can accept or reject that assertion, of course. If you reject it, and you are right, you will never know it. If, on the other hand, I'm right, then I'll be able to text you in the afterlife to say I told you so.

Secondly, if you think you can prove that god does not exist, then you are not an agnostic, but an atheist. An agnostic does not know whether or not god exists, but an atheist positively states that god does not exist.

Of course, neither a theist nor an atheist can prove their case, which is the natural argument for being an agnostic.

Then yes I'm gonna have to reject that assurtion... certainly going to reject it as fact. Because nobody knows that people are "infinite".

And I know the difference between agnostic & atheist PLC1!

I'm simply showing the other side of the coin... the atheist side. You have a faith only religion based side... and the I don't believe a God is or ever was possible atheist side.

I am an agnostic because while I've seen no proof whatsoever, until science proves exactly how the universe started I'm willing to leave all doors open from an intellectual standpoint.

For instance I don't believe in aliens either. But tomorrow an alien craft may land and explain the whole thing. A group of beings so far advanced ahead of us that they see us almost as we see ants going about their business living their lives.

Or Christ himself might appear and explain everything to all the people of the world.

Or maybe a God him or her or itself might make a public announcement... and that could be Allah or...

ROMAN GODS & GODDESSES
GREEK GODS & GODDESSES
CELTIC GODS & GODDESSES
CELTIC DEITIES
JAPANESE GODS & GODDESSES
HAWAIIAN GODS & GODDESSES
POLYNESIAN GODS
IRISH GODS & GODDESSES
WELSH GODS & GODDESSES
GODS & GODDESSES OF WAR
GODS & GODDESSES OF LOVE & SEXUALITY
SLAVIC GODS & GODDESSES
GODS OF PANTHEON
CHINESE GODS
GODS OF THUNDER or any other God... doesn't have to be the Christian one.

Do I believe with what I know right now any of this is going to happen... nope not a bit. But I await to be convinced.

And the whole agnostic/atheist thing is tedious anyway. It's like those of faith think I'm afraid to make that leap to atheist. I assure you I am not.

If I had to choose to be less open minded and pick... I'd go atheist over man made religion any day of the week. In fact if I was going "God" at all I'd probably go Deist like many of our Founding Fathers. A God created everything... and then just disappeared. With no connection to man made religion at all. Think for a minute if that's the truth. Man would he be pissed about all this Christ talk and such.

 

[PLC1]

If I had to choose to be less open minded and pick... I'd go atheist over man made religion any day of the week. In fact if I was going "God" at all I'd probably go Deist like many of our Founding Fathers. A God created everything... and then just disappeared. With no connection to man made religion at all. Think for a minute if that's the truth. Man would he be pissed about all this Christ talk and such.

I think god has a thicker skin than to be jealous of the gods we humans have created over the years, but maybe not. The Hebrews said that their god was a jealous god, after all, but, that doesn't mean that the real one will be.

Just keep that mind open. An open mind can absorb new ideas, after all, and wait and see if I text you in the next life to say I told you so.

 

[dahermit]

On the day you first sinned you died the first death and your spirit was separated from the love of God. The spirit dies but does not end so you too when your body decays (the second death) will not be gone. Death even for the unsaved is not an eternity of non-existence.

And regarding the first death: that is temporary if you/your spirit comes again into communion with God. it is only permanent if you never reconcile.

The second physical death is only a result of the first death and serves to demonstrate for you that you are indeed spiritually dead.

So just like the people Jesus came to save, died and will again be reunited with God, Jesus died and was later alive again. His physical death too is a model that serves to show you a spiritual truth.

Perhaps experiencing the torture and pain (and perhaps even being aware of a separation from God the Father) is not so bad in cosmic terms. Or perhaps it is. But it still was a substitute for the death you owed. It still allows you to be spiritually alive again if you have faith. I don't know about you but I don't care if the sacrifice was great or small I am just grateful to be the recipient of the grace.

All that tripe has convinced me. It is a good thing for you that, being religious nonsense, you cannot be called upon to prove any of the things you have spewed above. Now, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

On the day you first sinned you died the first death and your spirit was separated from the love of God. The spirit dies but does not end so you too when your body decays (the second death) will not be gone. Death even for the unsaved is not an eternity of non-existence.

And regarding the first death: that is temporary if you/your spirit comes again into communion with God. it is only permanent if you never reconcile.

The second physical death is only a result of the first death and serves to demonstrate for you that you are indeed spiritually dead.

So just like the people Jesus came to save, died and will again be reunited with God, Jesus died and was later alive again. His physical death too is a model that serves to show you a spiritual truth.

Perhaps experiencing the torture and pain (and perhaps even being aware of a separation from God the Father) is not so bad in cosmic terms. Or perhaps it is. But it still was a substitute for the death you owed. It still allows you to be spiritually alive again if you have faith. I don't know about you but I don't care if the sacrifice was great or small I am just grateful to be the recipient of the grace.

I have no problem with you believing this, everyone should be able to believe as their relationship with the universe leads them to believe. Where we part company is when beliefs get to forced on others. Gays and transsexuals being denied equality for instance. You have tried to present it as us forcing YOU, when in fact it is us trying to shake off the yoke of your religious beliefs that has been placed on our shoulders because we are a minority and have not fought back with the kind of violence that you have visited on us for hundreds of years.

 

[top gun]

I think god has a thicker skin than to be jealous of the gods we humans have created over the years, but maybe not. The Hebrews said that their god was a jealous god, after all, but, that doesn't mean that the real one will be.

It's easy to take for granted that one's own God is not just as likely to be the one the humans created. As in... they're all man made ideas.

Just keep that mind open. An open mind can absorb new ideas, after all, and wait and see if I text you in the next life to say I told you so.

Best text me now when we all know it will get through.

 

[Dr.Who]

I think god has a thicker skin than to be jealous of the gods we humans have created over the years, but maybe not. The Hebrews said that their god was a jealous god, after all, but, that doesn't mean that the real one will be.

Just keep that mind open. An open mind can absorb new ideas, after all, and wait and see if I text you in the next life to say I told you so.

An open mind can see how words mean different things at different times.

The word translated as jealous, for example in Galatians where it is listed as a sin, means one thing. And we all know what it means; it is a negative emotion because someone else owns something we would like to have ourselves.

But the word translated as jealous, for example in Exodus 20:5 means something different.

Suppose that you witnessed a man stealing a loaf of bread from a starving child. If I said that you were a jealous witness you would not likely be very familiar with that use of the word. But the situation is not at all about you being jealous about something you want for yourself. It is about you being jealous about something that rightfully belongs to the child rather than to the theif.

Yes, God is a jealous God. People rightfully should only worship the God who created the Universe and not any other false God. Worshiping false gods is misplaced worship and should be jealously discouraged.

Don't believe me? Do you think I have stretched this? Here is line number four from the online dictionary of the definition of jealousy:

"4. Vigilant in guarding something"

So yes, God is a jealous God and He should be.

 

[PLC1]

An open mind can see how words mean different things at different times.

The word translated as jealous, for example in Galatians where it is listed as a sin, means one thing. And we all know what it means; it is a negative emotion because someone else owns something we would like to have ourselves.

But the word translated as jealous, for example in Exodus 20:5 means something different.

Suppose that you witnessed a man stealing a loaf of bread from a starving child. If I said that you were a jealous witness you would not likely be very familiar with that use of the word. But the situation is not at all about you being jealous about something you want for yourself. It is about you being jealous about something that rightfully belongs to the child rather than to the theif.

Yes, God is a jealous God. People rightfully should only worship the God who created the Universe and not any other false God. Worshiping false gods is misplaced worship and should be jealously discouraged.

Don't believe me? Do you think I have stretched this? Here is line number four from the online dictionary of the definition of jealousy:

"4. Vigilant in guarding something"

So yes, God is a jealous God and He should be.

OK, that makes sense. There are a lot of words in the Bible that have different meanings from the ones from which they were translated.

Still, it makes one wonder about the admonition to have no other gods before me, as "I am a jealous god." That sounds a lot like the English meaning of the word jealous, does it not?

But no, I really don't believe that god is so thin skinned as to be jealous of all of the various gods we have created over the years. That would be rather immature, and no one is accusing god of being immature.

 

[numinus]

Yeah, but you wouldn't know what severe constipation was unless you'd had it, so my advice was given just in case. It was a gift, no charge, don't like? Don't use it.

Being free of charge doesn't make it relevant, now, does it?

Arguments are not proof.

LMAO.

Is there any logical proof that is not phrased as an argument?????

If I need to explain simple concepts like 'proof' and 'arguments' to you, that is an experience worse than constipation.

Posting the word "ontology" over and over again does not constitute proof of the souls existence.

But the proof is there. You need only google 'ontology' and you would have all the proof required for the soul.

A science or a study is the way it's defined, studying something doesn't make it real, doesn't provide proof.

If it were defined that way, then the definition is WRONG. Ontology is NOT a science -- it is a philosophy. There is no educational institution that I know of that represents it as ontological sciences.

Duh?

Since I never said that I begin to see why you are incapable of responding reasonably to what I write: you don't read what I write. All I can do is assume that you make up what you wish I had written so that you can respond in the way you would like to respond. If you are going to accuse me of writing something perhaps you should post my quote and tell where you got it. Duh?

Of course you did.

You argued that homosexuality is also a manifestation of love, have you not?

And if it is so, then it is covered by god's commandment of love, is that not how your absurd argument goes?

Therefore, introducing fecal matter to one's (and partner's) blood stream, hence seriously undermining both their immune systems is the logical and most probable consequence of the commandment of love. Do you follow?

Hence -- love up someone's a$$.

For a nominal Catholic you sure have been a faithful apologist for the Pope and his endless riches.

Haven't I already said that I base my opinions on facts and logic?

And have I not presented only facts and logic as far as the catholic teaching is concerned?

Once again you lie about me because you have nothing to say. You lie about what I say, you lie about my sex life, and you denigrate my intelligence. I suspect you feel pretty threatened by me to have to resort to that kind of repetitive character assassination.

I have utterly no interest in your sex life to justify lying about it in the public domain.

Duh?

If LOVE GOD and LOVE OTHERS AS YOURSELF are the two most important commandments in the Bible, then all other scriptures and all of the Pope's windbaggery should be judged against them. You don't like it, but there it is in your holy book by your Savior.

How about a masochist, hmmm? Does the commandment of love apply to a masochist -- to love others as themselves?

Clearly, that, in itself, is WRONG. Clearly, the imperative of christian love operates WITHIN the parameters of the natural law god prescribes for man.

 

[numinus]

I asked about Jesus' two most important commandments and Nums went off into a tirade about sex, so what about you? If these are the two most important commandments in the whole Bible, do you use them to measure all other scriptures against? And if you do, then how can you willfully participate in the persecution of gay people?

You wanted to edit the bible, remove the gospels from their context, reduce canon law to two vague principles -- simply because YOU WANT TO FORCE PEOPLE TO ACCEPT HOMO-EROTICISM NOT ONLY AS A MORAL GOOD BUT A DIVINE COMMANDMENT AS WELL -- against all facts and logic, no less.

Who exactly is lying, eh?