Since AJ777 seems to be evading questions we ask, i shall make a thread on two questions only. When asking about empirical evidence for his god, he talked about that:
1) Cosmological (Kalam) argument...AJ777, would you like to enlighten us?
2) The problem of Evil, by beginning at the start, the supposed Fall of Mankind. You will see why you god is a contradictory concept.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
So this is another AJ777 thread? You, uh . . . y'all really need another scapegoat, don't you think? 'Cause I could be just as outstanding in that capacity as AJ777.
Just something to think about.
LOL, but you can come here all you want, this thread could be made for a lot of theists.
He's not being scapegoated, he has been thoroughly mendacious on here, and he came here to seek us out, as have you. It seems ironic the two of you sought out atheists to lie about, and troll, then try to play the martyr when your duplicity is pointed out.
Where do you people get the nerve. You can't even read a fucking dictionary.
@ Sheldon
Oh look! The atheist is already crying "troll" like a boy crying wolf. Work on your rebuttals, Little Sheldon.
Haha, struck a nerve did I? That explains your puerile ad hominem rant anyway.
As I said it's ironic the two of you seek out atheists to lie about, and troll, then try to play the martyr when your duplicity is pointed out. How you theists do love to play the victim, hilarious.
@ Sheldon
My puerile ad hominem? There's the irony.
Empedocles: "My puerile ad hominem? There's the irony."
Right there.
Sorry, Sheldon. Could not help myself from helping to defend a brethren in arms.
rmfr
Are we all talking about Sheldon’s little Sheldon? Because I have heard, don’t you know, that it is quite little!
We all know you're a cowardly delusional moron, no need to keep up the act.
Thanks for that. It says it all about their facile beliefs, when all they can do is attack people who criticise them, then ignore what they've written. I always take it as a good sign when they gang up and do this, as I see ratpiss couldn't wait to join in with another of his sad and obsessive rants about penis size. You don't need to be Freud to decipher that.
No that's just funny, the irony as I said is theists like you and AJ777 going to the trouble to seek out atheists only so you can play the victim, and lie that they are obsessing over your beliefs. Though of course that is funny as well. No one said irony couldn't be funny.
@ Empedocles
Thank you so very much for being our new additional scapegoat.
rmfr
Empedocles,
Are you the new "John Breezy" persona?
@Diotrephes
I don't know what you mean by "John Breezy" persona. I suspect not. I've never heard of him.
Sounds like John Breezy.
rmfr
@arakish
Well, who the hell is John Breezy? Let me guess, some troll that you just had to get rid of because he disagreed with you, right?
Oh, here it comes . . .
@ Empedocles
Not a Troll. But evasive, oblique, deviously dodge, ambiguous, deceptive, unclear, misleading in every answer he gave to question posed to him. In other words, he never truly answered any questions. Just threw word salad without the dressing.
rmfr
@ Empedocles
John Breezy was a theist, a member of a splinter sect of christianity. His beliefs (if he truly held them) were similar to yours in many ways.
He was also overweeningly arrogant, was a stranger to the truth on many occasions and got booted by the mods for various reasons, none of which were "disagreements"
He also has/had several sock puppets which he used to troll these forums.
There now, please feel free to pursue the second most popular theist past time: "victimhood".
@Empedocles,
This verbal fight is funny but how do you answer to the OP?
I guess I cannot answer. Everything has been directed at AJ777 and Empedocles.
***tree slowly returns to forest and from deep within…***
But I wanted to stamp my feet, cry, scream, and holler like the theist brats that come here so often…
rmfr
I'm not really interested in the cosmological argument, but what exactly do you mean by the problem of Evil, by beginning at the start, the supposed Fall of Mankind. You will see why you god is a contradictory concept."
Do i have to do your work for you? As an average theist, you must know what define the monotheistic god and you must know Genesis.
@ Empedocles
You truly do not know how to research, do you? Have you ever heard of Google? Ever heard of Wikipedia?
Start here: Problem of Evil.
***tree rumbles back into forest while grumbling…***
[text removed]
rmfr
"The problem of evil is the question of how to reconcile the existence of evil with an omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient God (see theism). An argument from evil claims that because evil exists, either God does not exist or does not have all three of those properties."
Are theists not allowed to Google or something?
Sheldon: "Are theists not allowed to Google or something?"
Yep. Paul wrote about it somewhere. All a theist supposedly needs is the word of the Bible. Thus, this meme I saw somewhere...
Scientists/Atheists read many books and feel they still have a lot to learn.
Religious Absolutists barely read one book and feel they know everything.
rmfr
I’ll repeat what I wrote in another string: I sure wish people (both ‘sides’) would actually debate in this debate forum.
Aie Sir!
@CyberLN
I'm trying. You can jump in any time.
Yes, I'm aware of Genesis, but like the writers of the Bible, my beliefs are Henotheistic rather than monotheistic. You see, it's easier for me to see exactly what you are talking about before assuming that whatever you have to say on the subject is the same as anyone else.
The Hebrew word for evil is ra. Isaiah 45:7 (KJV) translates ra as evil, but a more accurate translation there would be calamity. So, I suppose, you are talking about God creating evil? It's a reference to the global deluge of Noah's day and the fall of man. Not much to explain other than that. That goes something like this. A similitude. A parent tells their child not to play in the busy street or something bad (ra) could happen. The child plays in the street anyway, but when his parent finds out he grounds the kid, which, to the kid, is a bad (ra) thing.
@Empedocles,
The New testament writers are adamant about being strictly monotheistic. The old testament can be read as a monolatry. Are you saying that the god you worship is not:
-all powerful
-omniscient
-omnipotent
-omnipresent
-all loving.
It is a false analogy, (good) parents do not promise Hell to disodebient chidren. I was talking more specifically about all this drama about a fruit and how this go with the god defined above.
Pages