pinkpapaver
Bluelighter
i've eaten jesus...an i'm waitin to meet him
neither you or crackhead are particulary bright...im superior in every aspect.your clearly intellectually challenged i dont judge you for that but i advise you to goto bed
The life cycle of the human is so insignificant and yet so massive, our deaths will be the smallest and biggest things to ever happen to us and thats what it all boils down to, good old cheery death![]()
I had to lol at this. that is some seriously arrogant shitps
Could God make 1 + 1 = 6 if he wanted to?
My last post was deleted, and I suppose it was pretty harsh, but I still stand by it. What you said was out of line, acieed, and you can pretend it was meant as pure sympathy, but it clearly wasn't. As I said to you via PM, I don't think you're a good Christian. Especially since you said you now have no sympathy and I was going on ignore. How Christian of you! Most atheists are better Christians than you. You obviously can't read this, as I'm on ignore, so there shouldn't be a response. Hallelujah! Sorry for upsetting the thread with my shite. :D
I know this is a monumentally difficult concept to grasp* but God is above logic. God created the universe including its rules. I think there could be realms where logic is tweaked lol... Think of the light spectrum. I know its a rather base example but what can be visibly seen is completely different in multiple ways. How would you describe the spectrum to a blind man.
I don't know the answer to the second question
* let me reassure you that that was not meant to be patronising
^ PTCH, as most of us here want to actually gain something, improve our understanding and help others, perhaps you could act a little more maturely if you want to join in? If you have an interest in theology and have something to add, great. But wouldn't it be more approriate if you actually responded to posts rather than digging out endless pictures and memes off Google?
omg someone pinch me tell me he never said...
look treacle here is my 100% honest and non angry response.
i feel bad now...you provoked me in the most outrageous way possible and got a reaction after my patience and thinking he doesnt mean that ... his pov doesnt wind me up or make me angry at all but you did suceed in getting me to lower myself to ur level...purely btw to see how it grabbed you when the shoe was on other foot not my style im a nice bloke but push anyone too far and see what happens ..
the mad thing is i can tell you despise me so much..it actually upsets me a little knowing i would still help you at any level if i could .dont waste your energy hating me try to be positive.
i have walked through fire helping very vunerable and even suicidal friends at my own expense...my own life was going down the swanney cos i hated myself but still did everything to help my friends.
i am dreadful christian riiite..
i would have layed down my own life if it could have saved my best pals.
i am cunt alright...a horrible bloke .
pm me if u wish...i will add it to my 999,999,999 list of things to read..shocker u hate me and i am devil incarnate...yawn.
quick ps..i find it very amusing that you still accuse me of being drunk..
i gave up alchol in 1998 after i had my stomach pumped and had a terrible expierence..
i had a few pints as witnessed by my photo here.my then gf told me you may take e and coke like a champ but real men drink...sorry didnt realise it was 1950 not the late 2000's
________________________________________________proto said:9 pages, 200+ posts . . . quite possibly a record for EUKADD
shambles said:I didn't say it was set up so we'd all fail, I said it was set up heavily skewed to making failing "the test" almost inevitible for anybody who really looks into this stuff. Expecting faith in the face of all evidence to the contrary. That's perverse.
Don't think I said "these ramblings are just your own intepretations" did I? If I put it like that I can only assume I was drunk and stroppy so apologise.
shambles said:I presume what I meant was that I didn't see how you arrived at your interpretations - why you chose to accept some parts of scripture and not others. Having it both ways, as it were. Saying that the "bad" OT stuff must have been altered or interpolated (them bleedin' pharisees at it again) for example. How do you know?
The posts between us I have never "picked and chose" interpretations. Just delivered the only practical meaning, supported by many other verses in the bible.shambles said:Basically, what is your interpretation/answer/belief to the questions and objections raised by myself and others, how and why you chose those particular interpretations/answers/objections over others and why those alternatives are wrong.
At the end of the day we don't know how hell works exactly, and as you said there's little said in the book. I have a few ideas. From a Christian perspective: Clearly, God has allowed evil on this world, and allowed the consequences of it in the next.shambles said:Yes he does. He didn't have to create such a place (obviously I don't believe he did anything due to lack of existence but we'll take that as read, eh?). It was a choice and he apparently decided that eternal torment was the best option and make it incredibly easy (by many interpretations anyway - I know there is a very wide range of beliefs about Hell and precious little actually said about it in the book) to be sent there too for good measure. Infinite punishment for finite crimes as it's often succinctly put. By definition this is unjust.
shambles said:When I spoke of large sections of the Bible being demonstrably untrue I was talking about the obvious stuff: Garden of Eden, The Flood, The Exodus and so on. Probably the majority of the OT can certainly be shown not to have ever happened. Or if it did all traces of evidence have been miracled out of existence so it looks that way (which would again be rather perverse to say the least). Some of this stuff is absolutely fundamental to the theology so is not just a few unimportant quibbles. Not even the standard response that such sections must be metaphorical, allegorical, poetic and so on really cuts it either. How is it determined which parts are not to be taken too literally? If there was no Adam and Eve there was no Fall, no Fall no need for the Crucifiction. That's fairly fundamental stuff. And if most of the... more "out there" OT stuff is meant as metaphorical lessons then why are they such bad lessons? Why is wickedness and immorality so frequently rewarded and held up as something to aspire to?
shambles said:I have to assume that's a joke? Disbelief makes people more inclined to evil acts? Really? Cos believers are so well behaved in comparison, I'm sure :D
I'll skip the blindingly obvious stuff (Crusades, Inquisitions, genocides, etc) and stick to a modern example not a million miles from your own - Andrea Yates. Difference being that she did what she did as a direct result of her religious convictions. Ian Brady was a deviant in many ways and Myra Hindley was easily led and probably somewhat sociopathic. I'm sure it might help a bit to lack belief in a vengeful god to do shit like that but I'm guessing he'd have done it anyway. The charming Ms Yates did what she did because she totally believed in a vengeful god and a Fallen world and genuinely thought she was doing the only sane thing out of love (I'm assuming some degree of mental illness must've been involved too but she wasn't just another psychopathic killer like Brady/Hindley - mental illness + strong religious beliefs = trouble). Not saying one is worse than t'other, just that to say disbelief makes one more prone to evil acts is just so far wide of the mark it's untrue. People do terrible things for any number of reasons and religious reasons are worryingly common.