How "Christian" of him!!

[DaShi]

Are you?

If you have a problem with me and what I say, have the courtesy to send me a pm.

I get really tired of people that I considered friends selling me out with a cheap shot just to make themselves look better.

No one can help it if you consider them friends. That's your own delusion.

[BlackCat]

Yet we also hear:



We have been warned he is coming. There is no excuse for not being ready for the coming of God. You are right that we don't know the when, but we do know he is coming. Just as Noah knew a flood was approaching, so we do know that Christ is coming.

Well, she seems to be an unreliable *****. Several prophets has said that she would be here both in 1000 ad and 2000 ad but she doesn't have honoured these promises - hope they have oil enough to yet 2000 more years of waiting.

[MrFun]

Poor BK - in his world, friends should never disagree with one another.

[Jon Miller]

Imran, just because they didn't know until the flood came doesn't mean they were not told.

Look at many people at this site or in the world. They are told things often but don't know them. This is because they refuse to beleive or to reason/etc.

This isn't the fault of the teller.

JM

[Berzerker]

according to the mesopotamian versions, the gods kept the impending flood secret - Enki (serpent deity) told the Sumerian Noah.

and its ridiculous to argue Noah building a boat is a warning, even to the relative handful of people who saw him. Actually, in the mesopotamian versions Noah didn't want people to know, he lied to them. He told them the God Enlil was mad at him and he was building a boat to sail south.

[Jon Miller]

In the Jewish and Christian versions, which are the more relevant ones, Noah preached about it and was mocked for it before the deluge.

Why would such a big boat be a secret? Why would relatively few people know about it? You are assuming a lot. I assume too, but I recognize my assumption, I don't go out and say that the Bible shows X. Rather I am saying that the Bible doesn't show Y.

And the New Testament assuredly implies X.

JM

[Boris Godunov]

I'm still trying to better understand why God did not intervene to save the babies who were killed in the Slaughter of the Innocents shortly after the birth of Jesus.

If it makes you feel better, there's no evidence such a massacre occured. It's a fiction.

[Boris Godunov]

Yeah, which is why you've resorted to narrative rather then debate. Thanks for a laugh Boris. Have fun talking to yourself.

I posted a summation because your hack-n-quote argument style was facilitating your dishonesty and your complete inability to keep focus in the argument. You continue to parse arguments and twist their meanings until you arrive at utterly, blinkingly stupid statements. For example:

Are you an atheist Boris? Then why do you believe that the Bible is accurate?

For the upteenth time, I am not now nor have I ever argued for Biblical accuracy, you ****ing imbecile. I said it very plainly: I'm accepting for the premesis of the argument that a Christian like Robertson WOULD view them as accurate, and showing how he *COULD* (not "MUST" as you again falsely claim) interpret a disaster as PERHAPS being divine punishment.

****ing hell, I don't know how to say it any clearer than that. No, I don't accept that the Biblical stories are accuracte, BUT CLEARLY ROBERTSON DOES, and that's the entire ****ing point.

That you still somehow think I'm arguing for Biblical accuracy here--despite my stating very explicitly that I'm arguing in a hypothetical context--shows you're either a total moron or a liar. Or, more probably, both.

Your signature line is a perfect example to the levels of deceit to which you sink. Anyone can read that statement in context and clearly understand that I was saying that YOUR argument was leading to that conclusion, not mine.

I go back to the point that you are a ****ty Christian, because you lie in almost every argument in which you engage. Clearly, that particular commandment doesn't mean much to you.

[Boris Godunov]

In the Jewish and Christian versions, which are the more relevant ones, Noah preached about it and was mocked for it before the deluge.

Why would such a big boat be a secret? Why would relatively few people know about it? You are assuming a lot.

JM

If an old man in the next town over from you started building a spaceship in his back yard, claiming a god had told him that the Earth was going to blow up in X days, would you believe him, or think he's a loon? Or at least, mistaken? How many "THE END IS NIGH" people do you ignore every day?

As for the second point, how did people thousands and thousands of miles away know about him building the Ark, considering there was no television, radio, or internet?

Hell, given ancient communication, it's likely people a few towns over wouldn't know anything about it.

[Boris Godunov]

This isn't the fault of the teller.

I would say it's certainly the fault of the supposedly omnipotent deity who wishes to convey the message, if he can't manage to get it out in a clear way that distinguishes it from any other nutjob claiming to speak with god.

[Boris Godunov]

If he is the source of reason then he's not subject to it, he is sovereign.

Exchanging the word "sovereign" for "dictator" doesn't in any way change my point. I see no logical reason for this assertion of yours. As I said: if the supposed "morals" dictated by a god are not applicable to said god, then they aren't "morals" at all, they're just arbitrary rules. Yes, a god must be held to the same standard, or it isn't morality at all.

Doesn't the Bible say people should strive to be more like God? "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect?" If so, then doesn't that refute the idea that there could be separate moral standards for men and another for god?

If Christians believe God is perfect, and part of his perfection is killing children, then logically...

By the way, there's no "contradiction" between me not believing in the Biblical God while also believing that conception of a god is immoral and disasteful.

I don't believe Inspector Javert really existed, but that doesn't stop me from expressing my distaste for such a concept of a policeman, especially were there a group of fanatics who believed he was real and that he was the model of what a good policeman should be.

[MrFun]

If an old man in the next town over from you started building a spaceship in his back yard, claiming a god had told him that the Earth was going to blow up in X days, would you believe him, or think he's a loon? Or at least, mistaken? How many "THE END IS NIGH" people do you ignore every day?

As for the second point, how did people thousands and thousands of miles away know about him building the Ark, considering there was no television, radio, or internet?

Hell, given ancient communication, it's likely people a few towns over wouldn't know anything about it.

Well, as far as Internet, Gore just wasn't around during that era to invent it at that time.

[Ben Kenobi]

As for the second point, how did people thousands and thousands of miles away know about him building the Ark, considering there was no television, radio, or internet?

Hell, given ancient communication, it's likely people a few towns over wouldn't know anything about it.

You are assuming that God didn't try to warn the others. We don't know this. All we know is that Noah responded to God. That suggests to me that Noah, because he was righteous listened to the warnings, and the unrighteous merely ignored them.

[Ben Kenobi]

Exchanging the word "sovereign" for "dictator" doesn't in any way change my point.

Sigh, this is a lexical problem, not a logical problem. The concept of the sovereignty of God, is that he is above all of us, that he is uncreated, and that we are his creation. This is different from a dictator, or a king. However, we don't have a good single word that confesses this statement, hence the use of sovereignty to try to express the concept.

I see no logical reason for this assertion of yours. As I said: if the supposed "morals" dictated by a god are not applicable to said god, then they aren't "morals" at all, they're just arbitrary rules.

So you are suggesting that 'do not murder', 'do not lie' are arbitrary rules? Your conduct suggests otherwise, and that even though you reject him, you still abide by his rules. The problem with applying God's rules to man back to God is that they just don't work. He is sovereign. The reason why murder is wrong is because you are expropriating the gift of life from someone else, a gift that you yourself did not grant. If you are God, who granted life, then it is entirely up to him to take it back.

Yes, a god must be held to the same standard, or it isn't morality at all.

Why? What sense does, 'thou should not covet thy neighbours stuff' have any sense when talking about God?

Doesn't the Bible say people should strive to be more like God? "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect?" If so, then doesn't that refute the idea that there could be separate moral standards for men and another for god?

That's a very good point. God is the source of morality. He is the essence of it. He, however is not bound to it, it is as much Him, as anything else.

If Christians believe God is perfect, and part of his perfection is killing children, then logically...

But without Him, there would be no children. He created them.

By the way, there's no "contradiction" between me not believing in the Biblical God while also believing that conception of a god is immoral and disasteful.

Yes, there is a contradiction. Do you comment on the nature of the Ogopogo? Or Yeti? Is Yeti an evil being?

I don't believe Inspector Javert really existed, but that doesn't stop me from expressing my distaste for such a concept of a policeman, especially were there a group of fanatics who believed he was real and that he was the model of what a good policeman should be.

The second problem is that you are relying on scripture for your account and your assertion that God is evil. My question, which you have AVOIDED.

Why is scripture accurate in this instance and inaccurate in others? You are picking and choosing.

Edit, your 500 word diatribe STILL FAILED to answer this simple question.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I go back to the point that you are a ****ty Christian, because you lie in almost every argument in which you engage. Clearly, that particular commandment doesn't mean much to you.

And I'm sure he doesn't repent for his sin on that matter.

You are assuming that God didn't try to warn the others. We don't know this. All we know is that Noah responded to God. That suggests to me that Noah, because he was righteous listened to the warnings, and the unrighteous merely ignored them.

That's quite a fanwank.