psst mis-t-highs. Your ignorance is showing. Put someone on ignore and see what it does. 
For anyone who likes to attack christianity as "blind faith"
- Thread starter Mr. Hamtastic
- Start date
Did Q say something useful this time?
psst mis-t-highs. Your ignorance is showing. Put someone on ignore and see what it does.
I think we both know about the ignore list, Ham. The point is that regardless of whether or not JSlog has me on ignore is irrelevant if he keeps looking at my posts anyways. Clearly, he's just an attention whore.
If what you are saying were true (and I agree with what you are saying), then I would make the same choice again based on testing the scriptures: There is no God.
It takes faith to believe the words. The words do not give the faith. I know the Bible says something else.
Scriptures say that faith comes from hearing the Word of God. It is wrong. That's how you brainwash someone, you repeat the same thing over and over relentlessly until they "believe" it. They would believe for many reasons (culture, brainwashing, mental health, etc.), all of this faith would be shallow and without knowledge.
God is the only one who can instill faith by proving his existence first.
It takes faith to believe the words. The words do not give the faith. I know the Bible says something else.
Scriptures say that faith comes from hearing the Word of God. It is wrong. That's how you brainwash someone, you repeat the same thing over and over relentlessly until they "believe" it. They would believe for many reasons (culture, brainwashing, mental health, etc.), all of this faith would be shallow and without knowledge.
God is the only one who can instill faith by proving his existence first.
I know what it does, but his honesty was at fault.psst mis-t-highs. Your ignorance is showing. Put someone on ignore and see what it does.
Because as "Q" said "JDawg" must have been stalking him, as he opened it to read the content, thus finding it was a reply to him, IE he could not ignore it.
And anybody that puts another on ignore, on a an open public forum is an imbecile.
I disagree with the notion that only weak or uneducated people are theists. That is a complete generalization. Statistically, there is no difference in intelligence between people who believe in the supernatural and people who don't. Secondly, I would say that 'love' and 'compassion' are 2 emotions that require some of the greatest strength. Anyone can hate and be merciless, but it takes true strength to react, instead, with compassion. And to love? Love is one of the greatest forces on Earth. People who think love is weak only fear the weakness inside themselves.
Oh, and just out of curiosity, maybe someone who is Christian can explain this to me:
If God created all life on Earth then it stands to show that God also created gays/lesbians, athiests, pagans, ect. ect. So, why then, do they have to go to hell for being what God made them? Who exactly gets sent to hell and what is the criteria?
If God created all life on Earth then it stands to show that God also created gays/lesbians, athiests, pagans, ect. ect. So, why then, do they have to go to hell for being what God made them? Who exactly gets sent to hell and what is the criteria?
They would say God created their bodies, but they had free will to go against God and sin.
I think we (rationally individuals) concede far too much to theists with arguments like these. firstly, it bypasses the questions of why believe in the first place. secondly, it leaves a wide opening to, as spidergoat pointed out, theists interpreting their religion to suit their views.jessiej920 said:
the better argument is to simply ask what someone ought to believe. ask a theist to give you criteria by which people should judge things to be true. by doing so, you show the hypocracy and fallacy in their argument.
most theist (that I have talk to) say the believe because of a feeling of one sort or another. thus, when they are asked whether a feeling is good enough to judge something as truth, then their arguments usually get pretty watery. maybe I should start a thread here to see if I can provoke any good arguments.
Well, I guess I don't really want to know what they think someone OUGHT to believe, but more or less what the eff the criteria is for damning someone to hell for eternity! I mean, it's just ridiculous that perfectly decent, "moral", law-abiding, average ppl should suffer a millenia-times-ten of fiery torment rather than go to heaven simply because they didn't accept jesus as their savior. That's just a bunch of BS to me, if you want to know the truth.
I just don't get it. :shrug:
I agree that much oh what monotheists believe is rediculous. however, if you ask for criteria for why going to hell you can always get an answer, and it will likely be different for each person you ask. moreover, you can't show the fallacy of someone's arguments with that question because everyone has their justifications.jessie said:
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
As opposed to a closed forum?
In any case....nah, putting someone on ignore is a nice option. It does not make one an imbecile nor is it caused by imbecility. Polls of how many posters one has put on ignore show a wide range of people who use the ignore function here.
As far as peeking at the occasional post...I've done this myself with some people who are on ignore. Sometimes since sometimes people are OK to deal with on certain topics. Sometimes one need a little refresher in why one put someone on ignore. Etc.