This coming from the religious right. - Page 14

So we have been taught our religious lessons, children,
and we already 'know' the answers, we just don't want
to acknowledge them ? Is that what is meant ^^^ ?

Well, what a perfect cop-out it is to throw THAT back, rather
than have to go to the trouble of explaining.

If Christianity is so important, and so worth telling the non-saved
about, and so worth defending lunatics and obsessives for, how
come there is no succinct, credible retort to "How can your all -
seeing, all-powerful God allow so many of his created subjects,
including those in his priesthood, to do so much harm to small humans ?"
except that we know the answers already, 'I won't tell you what you
already know (and) I am not going to preach'. LMFAO

Nice to see someone attempting to learn something, but you really do need to brush up on logical fallacies bee. Your "god of the gaps" is an argument from ignorance, still no stalemate :), so keep on going, you'll get there eventually and end up finding your error --- maybe, unless your need to "win" is stronger than your ability to learn.

God is allowing the people who teach the gospel to hurt children and at the same time those believers are fighting a woman's right to abortion. wow. If God was real he would take care of this problem. After all it is happening in his house of worship from the people who are supposed to be the closet to God. So, take into account all the timelines that don't add up and never will add up and wait for a new version of the bible to make it alright, right? God would rather kill everyone on the planet rather than take care of some of his disciples that are hurting the most precious gift of life, our children. Unbelievable and someone I would look up to, pray to and get comfort from, not. SMH.

Still looking for someone with the higher order thinking skills needed to investigate with integrity of scholarship, including the power of an imagination needed to realize what is significant in authorship of stories, or books, in particular the differences in story genres, and especially in the context of the orginating times when first told, either orally or written.

You'll have to make an honest attempt at that discovery, yourself, to prove to me any validity of intent, other than the typical insulting pastime usually engendered with this type of board discussion.

Or not, is my best bet on what will be the choice. Makes no matter to me. (Snark remarks aren't counted as intelligent participation in the challenge to disprove Jesus as less than perfect—FYI.) Here's a hint to drive this forward, start after his birth and avoid the virgin birth altogether, for the time being, since that is the red herring roadblock, or I would suspect, an excuse to be lazy with scholarship? No matter. His conception can always be revisited, for whatever other reason if wanted for a future discussion.

It has no bearing on the perfection of Jesus in his life, his words and deeds. Find something he said or did that is not peaceful, compassionate or truthful in the New Testament. I'll be real surprised, if any one can do that. I've found nothing to contradict this character myself, but I'm not a scripture expert like some claim to be on here.

Additionally, it looks like no proof or decent argument is available for a man made catalyst to support any sort of credible man made science experiment to repeat the creation of life. No proof of this experiment, can be nothing else, only that it is equal to the "no proof" of a God inspired miracle. And that means of course, your stated proofs aren't proofs, just discoveries, and you get no points for that, just a STALEMATE.

@GSD

LOL Your post makes me laugh. There is just so much wrong with it! I certainly won't be the one trying to change one speck of it, either. Just be sure that we aren't in agreement and I am more than happy to leave it at that.

Sounding increasingly desparate to "win", from here, Travels.

And that is always the case....to win!!

I love how you complain about snark remarks but cut down all of us because you have such a higher degree of thinking. Then you say you don't want to argue but you do in your oh so sneaky ways. Over and over you say you don't but deep down inside you most certainly do. And I would not boldly say you have this higher power of thinking because you can't even see the illogical parts of what you believe. Lets see we have to prove the beginning of life but you have no proof and it stands because you say so. We do have proof the first man came out of Africa but because that doesn't fit into the bible fantasy it is dismissed. We also have the fact that Noah could not have collected 2 of every species on the planet because most of those species lived on different continents and then after this genocide flood those animals were dispersed back onto their native continents. Then we have Adam and Eve who's children obviously bred with each other to produce every race known to man. But somehow this man written bible is the truth. When logic should tell you these things and plenty of others are impossible but that man written book that has been rewritten how many times is correct. I submit it isn't about a higher degree of thinking and more along the lines of extremely gullible. I don't want to argue although you do and I don't want to attack although you do and are.

@GSD

Wow. I am currently ignoring at least three people on this thread, and they persist in their own agenda to win the internet by a group effort to get my attention with their posts, just dying to declare me stupid. I am very careful to address you personally, GSD, in a post, please don't consider yourself included with any other ones.

I haven't declared myself higher thinking than everyone, only that I am using my imagination to add to my perception but people only want to hear what they want to hear. And even to the point they insist that they know what I am saying and meaning, better than myself. There is a preponderance of linear thinking here that stops exploration of concepts. And always ends up with "my logic is better than yours", so now I get to humiliate you.

I simply don't accept the humiliation, or the opinion. I am not going to refute your position regarding faith, because you have learned the traditional views and reject them. That is your perogative. I'm not trying to win converts or souls, in the least. I am not even qualified.

So, you say, since I am not following with the group think here, I must be... gullible, well, thanks, I guess that is better than stupid.

Any way, I asked if you wanted me to leave your thread, so I will, just say the word. Between you and me, you always win. I know that.

I am not kicking you off any thread, ever. Imagination is great, I get it, but it isn't real.