Ladies, what do you think? Women and children first? Not for God?

Rav said:
I guess you ignored me last time I pointed out that Christian theology teaches that Jesus was God. God became a man and sacrificed himself. But as God is omnipotent (supposedly) he also remained in heaven. So he experienced a father/son type relationship with himself.

I have no problem with you attacking Christianity, but it's pointless if you don't get it right.
Click to expand...

If people want their monotheist God, one God, having 20 different personalities then they can go talk to themselves and take their delusions with them.

I prefer to chat with people with at least 1/2 a brain. Hard to find in theist groups but some do break out of their indoctrination.

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am said:
What exactly is unfair about women and children first
Click to expand...

It would appear to be unfair to adult males. Why should their lives be worth less than those of others?

The tradition of 'women and children first' probably originated back when human beings lived in small hunting bands, when women spent most of their time pregnant and/or caring for small children, and when the women and children represented the future of the clan lineages that represented people's cultural identities. The adult males pictured themselves as the tough hunters/warriors of the group, and would confront whatever the challenge was while the more vulnerable women and children had time to make their escape.

It makes pragmatic sense in that kind of context, given the facts of human reproductive dimorphism, but the whole thing isn't exactly fair to either men or women.

and are you agreeing with God who says that children should die before their parents?
Click to expand...

How do you know what God supposedly says?

What are you arguing against in this thread? Something to do with 'God', but I'm not sure what.
 
Yazata said:
It would appear to be unfair to adult males. Why should their lives be worth less than those of others?
Click to expand...

It is not so much saying that a male life is worth less than a female life. It is saying that man places his duty ahead of his life. Chivalry is a good term to use here.

The tradition of 'women and children first' probably originated back when human beings lived in small hunting bands, when women spent most of their time pregnant and/or caring for small children, and when the women and children represented the future of the clan lineages that represented people's cultural identities. The adult males pictured themselves as the tough hunters/warriors of the group, and would confront whatever the challenge was while the more vulnerable women and children had time to make their escape.

It makes pragmatic sense in that kind of context, given the facts of human reproductive dimorphism, but the whole thing isn't exactly fair to either men or women.



How do you know what God supposedly says?
Click to expand...

I am going by what he did and extrapolated the words to express it.

What are you arguing against in this thread? Something to do with 'God', but I'm not sure what.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I argue against the notion that God is pushing and that is that men should outlive their sons and that sons are to be sacrificed instead of the parent stepping up.

Regards
DL
 
Me-Ki-Gal said:
I have no conflict between my flesh and my spirit. What are you talking about ? I am poor and made that sacrifice by my conduct my dear . I could be rich , but I let my self be cheated instead of cheating. Sometimes I wonder why I do it and don't just be like everyone else. I blame Jesus for my misery , except I am not miserable, but it is not from being poor . Me being poor is a reflection of the world made by Jesus . Yet we have to go through the fire , so now the question is the world going to save Me . Am I worthy of saving ? That is the big question . If not the world is doomed for I am the common work man. The burdens of common work people is to heavy to bare and my micro cosmic life is a refection of the burdens the common person endures . Lori Listen close my dear . The sacrifice has been made already . 40 years in the making . Now all the pieces are falling into place like dominoes. No stopping now . Can you count to 10? That seems to be our separation to the day Lori, to the day
Click to expand...

hm. the spiritual experience i had tore my flesh up.

let's see, 10 minutes, 10 hours, 10 days, 10 years, 10 decades, 10 miles, 10 words, 10 posts. let's go nuts trying to figure it out. just kidding. :)
 
Greatest I am said:
If people want their monotheist God, one God, having 20 different personalities then they can go talk to themselves and take their delusions with them.

I prefer to chat with people with at least 1/2 a brain. Hard to find in theist groups but some do break out of their indoctrination.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

Since you always seem to be talking about Jesus and his sacrifice all the time I can only assume that you are trying to level your attacks at Christianity. But Christian Theology doesn't teach that God wasn't willing to step up to the plate himself. It teaches that he did.

What value is there in attacking a straw man?

If the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is something you just can't accept then that's where you need to start. If you can unravel that one then rest of Christianity will go with it. In fact since you already seem to be certain that the Trinity is indeed a load of cods-wallop then from your perspective the entire religion should have come apart at the seams already making everything else inconsequential.
 
Last edited:
An ultimate Being with a system of Mind that plans, creates, and micromanages everything is as far from first and fundamental as one could get, for it could only come well after its parts and of course be very much dependent on them; so, there was positively no original Being who created everything else. This is a total disproof via self-contradiction and cannot be refuted.

‘God’ is modeled on our own being and is the largest begging of the question that could ever be. This hierarchy of mind stands for whatever form a being or Being is claimed to be make of. Believers just halt at the word, ‘God’, going no further, for strong emotion clouds rational reason and logic, as we can see in the posts.

All other layering upon the first misconception is just as moot as the first layer. Claiming magic cannot fix it.

As for most religions, they favor men over women.

There is even yet another disproof, for it can be shown that the basis of All was around forever, and so there could not have been a Creator since what was around forever could have itself had no creation.
 
What SciWriter is doing is arguing that God doesn't exist in the first place. This means that he doesn't even have to worry about the Trinity. It's the most efficient way to do it. You should take a leaf out of his book GIA.
 
Rav said:
Since you always seem to be talking about Jesus and his sacrifice all the time I can only assume that you are trying to level your attacks at Christianity. But Christian Theology doesn't teach that God wasn't willing to step up to the plate himself. It teaches that he did.

What value is there in attacking a straw man?

If the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is something you just can't accept then that's where you need to start. If you can unravel that one then rest of Christianity will go with it. In fact since you already seem to be certain that the Trinity is indeed a load of cods-wallop then from your perspective the entire religion should have come apart at the seams already making everything else inconsequential.
Click to expand...

On the Trinity---

Originally Posted by animefan48
Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.




Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)

But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)

http://home.pacific.net.au/~amaxwell/bdigest/bd12bbs.tx

--------------------

On why I am here-----

It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are Religionists.
They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Belief in fantasy is evil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HKHaClUCw4&feature=PlayList&p=5123864A5243470E&index=0&playnext=1

They also do much harm to their own.

African witches and Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI&feature=related

Jesus Camp 1of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOqGhcwwE1s

For evil to grow my friends, all good people need do is nothing.
Fight them when you can.

Regards
DL
 
There was nothing in there that would be compelling enough to cause a learned Christian to question the reality of the Trinity because it's all pretty clear from the Bible itself. At least the vast majority of them believe that to be the case anyway. I think you should read up a bit more so you can develop some really good arguments.

Perhaps you could start with Biblical Arguments Against the Trinity and then move on to Answering Common Objections to the Doctrine of the Trinity and finish with Answering the Answers to the Common Objections to the Doctrine of the Trinity.

(Actually, I was joking about that last one. The link actually takes you to a page on techniques for prevailing in a debate.)
 
Last edited:
Religious Isaac Newton went all nutty against the Trinity (and other things), and the poor guy was even employed by Trinity College. Only his science went somewhere.
 
Me-Ki-Gal said:
Your pretty good at cussing . I respect that . Modern language is a trip . Somethings can only be expressed using the F word .
Click to expand...
everything can be expressed with the F word, thereby making it mean nothing.

SciWriter said:
An ultimate Being with a system of Mind that plans, creates, and micromanages everything
Click to expand...
although the first two points are common among believers, i don't think micromanagment is agreed on by believers..



Rav said:
There was nothing in there that would be compelling enough to cause a learned Christian to question the reality of the Trinity because it's all pretty clear from the Bible itself.
Click to expand...
um..the cannonazation process is what determined what was put in that book..
so anything that is learned by a christian through that book, is directly related to what the ppl involved in the cannonization wanted them to learn.


(Actually, I was joking about that last one. The link actually takes you to a page on techniques for prevailing in a debate.)
Click to expand...
learn anything?
 
NMSquirrel said:
um..the cannonazation process is what determined what was put in that book..
so anything that is learned by a christian through that book, is directly related to what the ppl involved in the cannonization wanted them to learn.
Click to expand...

Christianity is the Bible. It doesn't matter how the book came to be or even if it contains any truth. All of Christian Theology derives from it and that is what I was referencing.
 
Rav said:
Christianity is the Bible. It doesn't matter how the book came to be or even if it contains any truth. All of Christian Theology derives from it and that is what I was referencing.
Click to expand...
the cannonization process determined what theology was put in it..
 
NMSquirrel said:
doctrine does not matter..its not about doing what your told..
what is in your heart? think for yourself.
Click to expand...

It's a nice sentiment Squirrel and I don't disagree with it. But if we're talking Christian doctrine here, then we need to get it right. My motivation, believe it or not, was to help GIA argue against Christianity more effectively. I wasn't being noble or anything, just passing some time on the forums :)
 
Rav said:
It's a nice sentiment Squirrel and I don't disagree with it. But if we're talking Christian doctrine here, then we need to get it right. My motivation, believe it or not, was to help GIA argue against Christianity more effectively. I wasn't being noble or anything, just passing some time on the forums :)
Click to expand...

Effectiveness is not in my hands when I try to debate a theist.
Have you not noticed that they just do not listen or ignore whatever makes them have to think for themselves.

I have said the following basic words to many.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjxZ6MrBl9E&feature=related

Regards
DL
 
NMSquirrel said:
doctrine does not matter..its not about doing what your told..
what is in your heart? think for yourself.
Click to expand...

Not to some.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11...paign=Feed:+rss/cnn_latest+(RSS:+Most+Recent)

The last thing the church wants is for sheeple to think for themselves.

If I had a buck for every time I have been told not to judge God by those who have judged him good and do not like when I judge him evil, I would be quite rich.

Strange how they are allowed to judge but are insulted when I do.

Regards
DL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top