| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Dr. Tom Snyder" |
| Date: |
08 Jul 2006 07:32:04 PM |
| Object: |
Intolerant Atheists? |
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00AF_01C6A2B4.6D80AC00
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
"It may be true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our =
truth is that what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, =
because that's our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because =
that's your truth!"
How Can You Say Jesus Is the Only Way to God?
People who challenge Christians with "How can you say Jesus is the only =
way to God?" are good at verbal camouflage, what sounds like concern for =
tolerance but which is actually belief that Jesus is not qualified to =
declare the way to God. Their problem is not with tolerance, but with =
Jesus' authority.=20
Promoters of religious pluralism say it is applicable in all situations, =
including religion. However, they don't really believe it. They are =
willing to accept one way if they believe it is appropriate, and to =
listen to authority when it is in their best interests or they have =
confidence in the authority. They don't promote pluralism regarding to =
breathe or not to breathe (only one way keeps someone living). They =
follow their employers' way of doing things to keep their jobs. They =
follow detour signs held by orange-jacketed construction workers. When =
it comes to religion, however, suddenly pluralism is an absolute and =
anyone, such as Jesus, who is so narrow minded as to say his religion is =
the only way to God, is convicted of intolerance.=20
How does a Christian respond? First, show the skeptic that he is, =
himself, intolerant of at least one religious view -- Christianity, =
which makes exclusive claims about salvation. Then, show him that =
consistent pluralism is meaningless because by giving the same truth =
value to conflicting claims, it denies truth to any claim.=20
Recently a religious tolerance advocate said Christianity wasn't true =
because it was intolerant. Tolerance was the only way to test religious =
truth. We disagreed, offering to give evidence and reasons that =
Christianity was true and what he believed was false. Immediately, he =
replied, "That's what I mean. You're wrong because you judge me. =
Whatever anyone believes is true." You can guess how we answered him: =
"Be tolerant. Don't say we're wrong. Stop judging us. Whatever we =
believe is true." Realizing he had been self-contradictory, he tried to =
recover, saying, "Well, it's true for you, but not for me." Sadly, he =
only dug his hole deeper. We replied, "Our truth for us is that you =
don't have truth. So that must be true, because it's our truth. So =
you're still wrong." Frustrated, he said, "No, you don't understand. If =
it's true for you, it only applies to you, not to anyone else. It's true =
for you, but not for me." We couldn't resist one more round: "It may be =
true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our truth is that =
what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, because that's =
our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because that's your =
truth!" He finally threw up his hands and admitted that his system was =
getting nowhere. What followed was an honest, friendly discussion about =
what kinds of evidence and reasons it would take to qualify someone to =
speak with authority about how humans can know God.=20
In addition to learning about the claims of Christianity and Jesus =
Christ, he learned that tolerance is only a virtue if it is applied =
appropriately, not universally. C. S. Lewis explains,=20
Some people say this attitude is "intolerant." "He's the sort of man," =
they complain, "who thinks his own beliefs are true and everyone else's =
are wrong." But after all how can any man help doing that? A man must =
think his own belief true because if he didn't it would not be his =
belief. "Your belief" means "what you think true." And if you think the =
thing true, of course you must think the opposite false. But this is a =
very different thing from saying that those who hold the opposite belief =
are necessarily bad or stupid.(1)=20
Having discarded the tolerance camouflage, we can turn to meaningful =
discussion on the merits of different salvation claims.=20
If there is only one God who is eternal, all-powerful, all-good, =
all-loving, all-knowing, and fully just; and He creates us in His image, =
we would be completely fulfilled if we related to Him the way He wants =
us to, in harmony with His will. As the creator from concept to =
production line, he would know the most about the perfect purpose of his =
creations. No one else could compete with him regarding his creations' =
functions or destiny. If He were to say one's destiny is determined by =
how many hot peppers he can consume, no one could bring greater =
authority or knowledge to dispute him. If He were to say that one's =
destiny is determined by how he responds to God's loving sacrifice of =
His Son on behalf of all who are separated by sin from God, He cannot be =
disputed.=20
We evaluate different salvation plans by reasonably comparing them to =
what we know about history, the world, humanity, and God's nature and =
character. Any plan that contradicts any know fact is at best =
inadequate, and at worst, completely wrong.=20
A plan depending on the fundamental goodness of humanity fails because =
it contradicts the testimony of history, insights into human nature, and =
our self-awareness of the sinfulness of humanity. A plan that saves all =
people regardless of their hatred of God contradicts both God's justice =
(sin is punished, goodness is rewarded) and God's mercy (He's too kind =
to force anyone who permanently hates Him to spend eternity in His =
loving presence). A plan that depends on God pre-empting someone's =
unique personhood and personal moral responsibility contradicts what we =
know about humans as responsible moral agents, created in God's image to =
love him with our own love, not by means of a programmed operating =
system that mimics love. A plan that annihilates those who don't go to =
heaven contradicts the fact of humanity created in God's image as =
enduring persons who have personal responsibility and endless, =
interactive consciousness. A plan proposing multiple lifetimes to work =
off one's own transgressions violates God's standard of holiness, which =
is perfect, not perfect-minus-one. A plan including all contradictory =
and mutually exclusive plans is irrational and denies God's ability and =
desire to communicate consistently and unambiguously to encourage =
repentance and faithfulness.=20
If we were to test each plan of salvation, all would fail except =
Christianity. To test each plan would be incredibly inefficient. It =
would be like having five thousand cars in a parking lot, only one of =
which has an engine, and trying every single one to find the one that =
worked. You could try 4,999 unsuccessfully and know without even turning =
the key that car 5,000 works. However, if the person who put the cars in =
the parking lot and chose the one with the engine were to tell you where =
that car is, pointed it out, led you to it, sat you in the seat, and =
even turned the key for you, people would call you a fool to insist, =
"You're too narrow-minded and intolerant. I'd rather try a few other =
cars first. I have my own ideas about where the engine is."=20
Christianity is the car with the engine. It fits the facts, makes sense, =
perfectly reflects God's nature and character, and tells the truth about =
human nature and our predicament separated from God by sin. If we are =
created in the image of the God described in the Bible, if we are =
separated from Him by our own sin, and if He loves us so much that He =
would provide Himself a sacrifice for human sin that reconciles His =
justice and mercy, wouldn't it make sense for Him to come Himself, =
demonstrate His identity and authority through His words and works, and =
then point us to the only way?=20
The truth of Christianity has significance quantumly beyond the car =
engine analogy, however. Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft affirms, =
"the point of Christianity is the living Christ. He is not an ancient =
ideal but a real person here and now, ready to barge in and transform =
our lives. . . . The love of God is the answers not only to (1) the =
quest for the supreme value. . . and to (2) the quest for the supreme =
reality. . . but it is also the answer to the third quest, the quest for =
life's deepest meaning and purpose."(2)=20
The next time someone accuses you of being intolerant of other ways, =
share the good news of the gospel with him confidently. It's the truth.=20
1. C. S. Lewis. Beyond Personality. London: Geoffrey Bles: The Centenary =
Press, 1944, pp. 5-6.=20
2. Peter Kreeft. The God Who Loves You. Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Books, =
1988, p. 29.
------=_NextPart_000_00AF_01C6A2B4.6D80AC00
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1555" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><A href=3D"http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html"><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html</FONT></A></DIV>=
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"It may be true for <U>you</U> that our =
truth is=20
only true for <U>us</U>, but <U>our</U> truth is that what is true for =
us is=20
<U>also</U> true for you, so you lose, because that's <U>our</U> truth, =
and you=20
can't apply <U>your</U> truth to <U>us</U> because that's <U>your</U>=20
truth!"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<CENTER>
<H3>How Can You Say Jesus Is the Only Way to God?</H3></CENTER>
<P>People who challenge Christians with "How can you say Jesus is the =
only way=20
to God?" are good at verbal camouflage, what sounds like concern for =
tolerance=20
but which is actually belief that Jesus is not qualified to declare the =
way to=20
God. Their problem is not with tolerance, but with Jesus' authority.=20
<P>Promoters of religious pluralism say it is applicable in all =
situations,=20
including religion. However, they don't really believe it. They are =
willing to=20
accept one way if they believe it is appropriate, and to listen to =
authority=20
when it is in their best interests or they have confidence in the =
authority.=20
They don't promote pluralism regarding to breathe or not to breathe =
(only one=20
way keeps someone living). They follow their employers' way of doing =
things to=20
keep their jobs. They follow detour signs held by orange-jacketed =
construction=20
workers. When it comes to religion, however, suddenly pluralism is an =
absolute=20
and anyone, such as Jesus, who is so narrow minded as to say his =
religion is the=20
only way to God, is convicted of intolerance.=20
<P>How does a Christian respond? First, show the skeptic that he is, =
himself,=20
intolerant of at least one religious view -- Christianity, which makes =
exclusive=20
claims about salvation. Then, show him that consistent pluralism is =
meaningless=20
because by giving the same truth value to conflicting claims, it denies =
truth to=20
any claim.=20
<P>Recently a religious tolerance advocate said Christianity wasn't true =
because=20
it was intolerant. Tolerance was the only way to test religious truth. =
We=20
disagreed, offering to give evidence and reasons that Christianity was =
true and=20
what he believed was false. Immediately, he replied, "That's what I =
mean. You're=20
wrong because you judge me. Whatever anyone believes is true." You can =
guess how=20
we answered him: "Be tolerant. Don't say we're wrong. Stop judging us. =
Whatever=20
we believe is true." Realizing he had been self-contradictory, he tried =
to=20
recover, saying, "Well, it's true for you, but not for me." Sadly, he =
only dug=20
his hole deeper. We replied, "Our truth for us is that you don't have =
truth. So=20
that must be true, because it's our truth. So you're still wrong." =
Frustrated,=20
he said, "No, you don't understand. If it's true for you, it only =
applies to=20
you, not to anyone else. It's true for you, but not for me." We couldn't =
resist=20
one more round: "It may be true for <U>you</U> that our truth is only =
true for=20
<U>us</U>, but <U>our</U> truth is that what is true for us is<U> =
also</U> true=20
for you, so you lose, because that's <U>our</U> truth, and you can't =
apply=20
<U>your</U> truth to<U> us</U> because that's <U>your</U> truth!" He =
finally=20
threw up his hands and admitted that his system was getting nowhere. =
What=20
followed was an honest, friendly discussion about what kinds of evidence =
and=20
reasons it would take to qualify someone to speak with authority about =
how=20
humans can know God.=20
<P>In addition to learning about the claims of Christianity and Jesus =
Christ, he=20
learned that tolerance is only a virtue if it is applied appropriately, =
not=20
universally. C. S. Lewis explains,=20
<P>Some people say this attitude is "intolerant." "He's the sort of =
man," they=20
complain, "who thinks his own beliefs are true and everyone else's are =
wrong."=20
But after all how can any man help doing that? A man must think his own =
belief=20
true because if he didn't it would not be his belief. "Your belief"=20
<EM>means</EM> "what you think true." And if you think the thing true, =
of course=20
you must think the opposite false. But this is a very different thing =
from=20
saying that those who hold the opposite belief are necessarily bad or =
stupid.<A=20
href=3D"http://www.answers.org/#N_1_"><SUP>(1)</SUP></A>=20
<P>Having discarded the tolerance camouflage, we can turn to meaningful=20
discussion on the merits of different salvation claims.=20
<P>If there is only one God who is eternal, all-powerful, all-good, =
all-loving,=20
all-knowing, and fully just; and He creates us in His image, we would be =
completely fulfilled if we related to Him the way He wants us to, in =
harmony=20
with His will. As the creator from concept to production line, he would =
know the=20
most about the perfect purpose of his creations. No one else could =
compete with=20
him regarding his creations' functions or destiny. If He were to say =
one's=20
destiny is determined by how many hot peppers he can consume, no one =
could bring=20
greater authority or knowledge to dispute him. If He were to say that =
one's=20
destiny is determined by how he responds to God's loving sacrifice of =
His Son on=20
behalf of all who are separated by sin from God, He cannot be disputed.=20
<P>We evaluate different salvation plans by reasonably comparing them to =
what we=20
know about history, the world, humanity, and God's nature and character. =
Any=20
plan that contradicts any know fact is at best inadequate, and at worst, =
completely wrong.=20
<P>A plan depending on the fundamental goodness of humanity fails =
because it=20
contradicts the testimony of history, insights into human nature, and =
our=20
self-awareness of the sinfulness of humanity. A plan that saves all =
people=20
regardless of their hatred of God contradicts both God's justice (sin is =
punished, goodness is rewarded) <U>and</U> God's mercy (He's too kind to =
force=20
anyone who permanently hates Him to spend eternity in His loving =
presence). A=20
plan that depends on God pre-empting someone's unique personhood and =
personal=20
moral responsibility contradicts what we know about humans as =
responsible moral=20
agents, created in God's image to love him with our own love, not by =
means of a=20
programmed operating system that mimics love. A plan that annihilates =
those who=20
don't go to heaven contradicts the fact of humanity created in God's =
image as=20
enduring persons who have personal responsibility and endless, =
interactive=20
consciousness. A plan proposing multiple lifetimes to work off one's own =
transgressions violates God's standard of holiness, which is perfect, =
not=20
perfect-minus-one. A plan including all contradictory and mutually =
exclusive=20
plans is irrational and denies God's ability and desire to communicate=20
consistently and unambiguously to encourage repentance and faithfulness. =
<P>If we were to test each plan of salvation, all would fail except=20
Christianity. To test each plan would be incredibly inefficient. It =
would be=20
like having five thousand cars in a parking lot, only one of which has =
an=20
engine, and trying every single one to find the one that worked. You =
could try=20
4,999 unsuccessfully and know without even turning the key that car =
5,000 works.=20
However, if the person who put the cars in the parking lot and chose the =
one=20
with the engine were to tell you where that car is, pointed it out, led =
you to=20
it, sat you in the seat, and even turned the key for you, people would =
call you=20
a fool to insist, "You're too narrow-minded and intolerant. I'd rather =
try a few=20
other cars first. I have my own ideas about where the engine is."=20
<P>Christianity is the car with the engine. It fits the facts, makes =
sense,=20
perfectly reflects God's nature and character, and tells the truth about =
human=20
nature and our predicament separated from God by sin. If we are created =
in the=20
image of the God described in the Bible, if we are separated from Him by =
our own=20
sin, and if He loves us so much that He would provide Himself a =
sacrifice for=20
human sin that reconciles His justice and mercy, wouldn't it make sense =
for Him=20
to come Himself, demonstrate His identity and authority through His =
words and=20
works, and then point us to the only way?=20
<P>The truth of Christianity has significance quantumly beyond the car =
engine=20
analogy, however. Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft affirms, "the point =
of=20
Christianity is the living Christ. He is not an ancient ideal but a real =
person=20
here and now, ready to barge in and transform our lives. . . . The love =
of God=20
is the answers not only to (1) the quest for the supreme <EM>value</EM>. =
.. . and=20
to (2) the quest for the supreme <EM>reality</EM>. . . but it is also =
the answer=20
to the third quest, the quest for life's deepest <EM>meaning</EM> and=20
<EM>purpose</EM>."<A =
href=3D"http://www.answers.org/#N_2_"><SUP>(2)</SUP></A>=20
<P>The next time someone accuses you of being intolerant of other ways, =
share=20
the good news of the gospel with him confidently. <EM>It's the =
truth.</EM>=20
<P><A name=3DN_1_>1. </A>C. S. Lewis. <U>Beyond Personality.</U> London: =
Geoffrey=20
Bles: The Centenary Press, 1944, pp. 5-6.=20
<P><A name=3DN_2_>2. </A>Peter Kreeft. <U>The God Who Loves You.</U> Ann =
Arbor,=20
MI: Servant Books, 1988, p. 29.</P>
<P> </P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><!-- AIA --></P></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00AF_01C6A2B4.6D80AC00--
.
|
|
| User: "Doc Smartass" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 10:22:48 PM |
|
|
"Dr. Tom Snyder" <titus213@adelphia.net> wrote in
news:38udnbtOnuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com:
Their problem is not with tolerance, but with Jesus' authority.
A dead man has no authority.
A religious ***** spouting supposed sayings of a dead man with no
authority has no credibility.
A religion of assholes with no credibility spouting sayings of a dead man
with no authority has no right to breathe my fucking air and deserves every
*****-whipping it receives, and so do its followers.
Bend it on over, fuckchop. I'm getting my boots.
--
Doc Smartass
"I am George W. Fudd, Miwwionaire. I own a mansion, a yacht, and your phone
number."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 07:59:37 AM |
|
|
"Dr. Tom Snyder" <titus213@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:38udnbtOnuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com...
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
"It may be true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our truth
is that > what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, because
that's our truth, > and you can't apply your truth to us because that's your
truth!"
How many ways is this flawed? Let me count the ways:
1. Assertion of a truth claim does not establish that the claim is true.
"It may be true for you that our truth is only true for us, ...
2. Truth has never been shown to be relative.
... but our truth is that what is true for us is also true for you, ...
3. Ditto
... so you lose, ...
4. A heirarchy of relative truths has never been demonstrated..
... because that's our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because
that's your truth!"
5. It cuts both ways, Einstein.
Regards,
Josef
But the more firmly they believe in their delusions, the more they stand
in need of treatment.
-- Epictetus
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tony Neville" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 12:40:30 AM |
|
|
After serious thinking Dr. Tom Snyder wrote :
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
"It may be true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our truth is
that what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, because that's
our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because that's your truth!"
Exactly. The quote encapsulates nicely why subjectivism in all its
guises is a deadend. This includes religion, too. You are in no
better stead. We are natural beings in a natural universe with natural
sensory apparatus to perceive the the natural world around us. So,
that is where all inquiry must proceed. No part of this picture
involves a so-called supernature. One has to take a gigantic leap of
faith to claim the existence of the supernatural from the natural
realm, because logic guided reason will not get one there. That is why
all religion by its very nature is subjectivist. You lack the threads
of inquiry that make a case for the supernatural let alone the
existence of your God. All that is left is your Holy Truth verses
their Holy Truth.
Tony.
(Christchurch, New Zealand.)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Barber" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 02:53:19 AM |
|
|
Dr. Tom Snyder wrote:
<snip>
For some strange reason, I don't find the argument "religious pluralism
is meaningless, therefore Christianity is right" very satisfying.
Oh, and *which* version of Christianity is right?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Barber" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 02:46:21 AM |
|
|
Dr. Tom Snyder wrote:
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
<snip>
Ooh, goody! Word games! Are you any good at cryptic crosswords? I'm
stuck on the Times Saturday Jumbo...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 08:16:08 PM |
|
|
Dr. Tom Snyder wrote:
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
[]
How does a Christian respond? First, show the skeptic that he is, himself, intolerant of at least one religious view -- Christianity, which makes exclusive claims about salvation.
I'm not intolerant of Christianity. I'm intolerant of Christians that
can not shut the ***** up about their gods and the other aspects of
their religion. They may think they're doing the world a favor, but
that only goes to show how out of touch with it they are. (And they
brag about being "not of this world".
Do I wish the Christianity meme would just die already? Of course, but
I am still tolerant of those that hold it. There is a difference
between tolerance and approval. I won't bother them if they don't
bother me, but I won't validate their beliefs.
[]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 08:39:27 PM |
|
|
On 8 Jul 2006 18:16:08 -0700, "Chris Johnson" <effigies@gmail.com>
wrote:
Dr. Tom Snyder wrote:
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
[]
How does a Christian respond? First, show the skeptic that he is,
himself, intolerant of at least one religious view -- Christianity,
which makes exclusive claims about salvation.
I'm not intolerant of Christianity. I'm intolerant of Christians that
can not shut the ***** up about their gods and the other aspects of
their religion. They may think they're doing the world a favor, but
that only goes to show how out of touch with it they are. (And they
brag about being "not of this world".
Exactly - it is a standard, whining paranoid lie by Christians, that
the natural human reaction to forcing their religion on others, is
intolerance of Christianity.
As you say, it's those Christians who can't live and let live.
It's a problem that won't go away because their religion is an
evangelising one. Couple that with an intolerant fundamentalism that
goes after people, knowledge, other religions, activities they don't
like and it's even worse.
Moderate non-fundamentalists are seen as tacitly supporting them,
because they don't speak out against them. I think this is because
they view is as their freedom of religion.
Do I wish the Christianity meme would just die already? Of course, but
I am still tolerant of those that hold it. There is a difference
If they have the common sense, decency, courtesy and tolerance to
allow others outside their religion to live and let live, I have no
problem either.
I'm not going to try and deconvert anybody. Their religion is part of
their very identity. If they weren't religious they would be
completely different people. I have no right to change that even if I
wanted to.
But the evangelicals and other missionary religions see nothing wrong
with doing that to others, to the point of religious harassment if
they're not interested. And they haven't the decency to grasp that
when they put themselves in somebody else's personal space the only
point of view that counts is the other guy's.
between tolerance and approval. I won't bother them if they don't
bother me, but I won't validate their beliefs.
[]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rune B" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 02:53:43 AM |
|
|
On 8 Jul 2006 18:16:08 -0700, "Chris Johnson" <effigies@gmail.com>
wrote:
I'm not intolerant of Christianity.
I am! And proud of it! ***** Christianity, and the worthless wave of
apathy and poverty it rode in on!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 02:00:34 AM |
|
|
In article <38udnbtOnuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com>,
"Dr. Tom Snyder" <titus213@adelphia.net> wrote:
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
"It may be true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our truth is
that what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, because that's
our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because that's your truth!"
How Can You Say Jesus Is the Only Way to God?
People who challenge Christians with "How can you say Jesus is the only way
to God?" are good at verbal camouflage, what sounds like concern for
tolerance but which is actually belief that Jesus is not qualified to declare
the way to God. Their problem is not with tolerance, but with Jesus'
authority.
The problem is not with Jesus' authority but with the lack of evidence
for his existence. No existence, no authority.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 09:18:45 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 17:32:04 -0700, "Dr. Tom Snyder"
<titus213@adelphia.net> wrote:
<snip crap>
I'm not intolerant of Christianity per se, but I do not suffer fools.
If I'm less than polite to you, perhaps you now know the reason.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 02:47:43 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 17:32:04 -0700, "Dr. Tom Snyder"
<titus213@adelphia.net> wrote:
<snip>
Jesus Christ, will you please learn how to format your posts properly?
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 09:10:46 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 17:32:04 -0700, "Dr. Tom Snyder"
<titus213@adelphia.net> wrote:
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
"It may be true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our truth is that what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, because that's our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because that's your truth!"
And that makes sense to....... four hundred fucking lines of
Apologetic?
Sorry. The Lies and Excuses Department of superstition are the
purest *****.
Welcome to the a.a. ***** Hole. You won't be lonely.
Oh... Don't expect a heated debate. You have Religious Wanker on
your forehead.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 10:34:26 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Stephen Knight (wooly51
@comcast.net) made the light shine upon us with this:
Oh... Don't expect a heated debate. You have Religious Wanker on
your forehead.
665. Missed it by *that* much.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
The laws that require me to NOT kill people I don't like REALLY bug
me, or there would be many less of YOUR kind.
-John Weatherly
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Harry F. Leopold" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 04:22:06 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 19:32:04 -0500, Dr. Tom Snyder wrote
(in article <38udnbtOnuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com>):
Oh, look, it is the insane, fake doctor, Tom. Hi, fake, insane, doctor Tom!
--
Harry F. Leopold
aa #2076
AA/Vet #4
The Prints of Darkness
(remove gene to email)
³We don't just borrow words; on occasion English has pursued other languages
down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new
vocabulary."-James D. Nicoll
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 08:33:06 PM |
|
|
Previously, on alt.atheism, Dr. Tom Snyder in episode
<38udnbtOnuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com>...
<snipping gibberish>
Oh look, nothing left...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
09 Jul 2006 12:10:28 AM |
|
|
So much text and it _all_ misses the point completely.
Christians aren't under accusation for believing in jebus. They are blamed
for trying to impose their specific belief on others, without any objective
evidence of it being true.
Nice attempt of avoiding the real problem. Too bad, for you, that it doesn't
work.
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove, and gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer, and fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
My personal judgment of monotheism:
http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Greywolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Intolerant Atheists? |
08 Jul 2006 08:59:49 PM |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C6A2D1.744C9B80
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"Dr. Tom Snyder" <titus213@adelphia.net> wrote in message =
news:38udnbtOnuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com...
http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html
"It may be true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our =
truth is that what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, =
because that's our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because =
that's your truth!"
How Can You Say Jesus Is the Only Way to God?
People who challenge Christians with "How can you say Jesus is the =
only way to God?" are good at verbal camouflage, what sounds like =
concern for tolerance but which is actually belief that Jesus is not =
qualified to declare the way to God. Their problem is not with =
tolerance, but with Jesus' authority.=20
Promoters of religious pluralism say it is applicable in all =
situations, including religion. However, they don't really believe it. =
They are willing to accept one way if they believe it is appropriate, =
and to listen to authority when it is in their best interests or they =
have confidence in the authority. They don't promote pluralism regarding =
to breathe or not to breathe (only one way keeps someone living). They =
follow their employers' way of doing things to keep their jobs. They =
follow detour signs held by orange-jacketed construction workers. When =
it comes to religion, however, suddenly pluralism is an absolute and =
anyone, such as Jesus, who is so narrow minded as to say his religion is =
the only way to God, is convicted of intolerance.=20
How does a Christian respond? First, show the skeptic that he is, =
himself, intolerant of at least one religious view -- Christianity, =
which makes exclusive claims about salvation. Then, show him that =
consistent pluralism is meaningless because by giving the same truth =
value to conflicting claims, it denies truth to any claim.=20
Recently a religious tolerance advocate said Christianity wasn't true =
because it was intolerant. Tolerance was the only way to test religious =
truth. We disagreed, offering to give evidence and reasons that =
Christianity was true and what he believed was false. Immediately, he =
replied, "That's what I mean. You're wrong because you judge me. =
Whatever anyone believes is true." You can guess how we answered him: =
"Be tolerant. Don't say we're wrong. Stop judging us. Whatever we =
believe is true." Realizing he had been self-contradictory, he tried to =
recover, saying, "Well, it's true for you, but not for me." Sadly, he =
only dug his hole deeper. We replied, "Our truth for us is that you =
don't have truth. So that must be true, because it's our truth. So =
you're still wrong." Frustrated, he said, "No, you don't understand. If =
it's true for you, it only applies to you, not to anyone else. It's true =
for you, but not for me." We couldn't resist one more round: "It may be =
true for you that our truth is only true for us, but our truth is that =
what is true for us is also true for you, so you lose, because that's =
our truth, and you can't apply your truth to us because that's your =
truth!" He finally threw up his hands and admitted that his system was =
getting nowhere. What followed was an honest, friendly discussion about =
what kinds of evidence and reasons it would take to qualify someone to =
speak with authority about how humans can know God.=20
In addition to learning about the claims of Christianity and Jesus =
Christ, he learned that tolerance is only a virtue if it is applied =
appropriately, not universally. C. S. Lewis explains,=20
Some people say this attitude is "intolerant." "He's the sort of man," =
they complain, "who thinks his own beliefs are true and everyone else's =
are wrong." But after all how can any man help doing that? A man must =
think his own belief true because if he didn't it would not be his =
belief. "Your belief" means "what you think true." And if you think the =
thing true, of course you must think the opposite false. But this is a =
very different thing from saying that those who hold the opposite belief =
are necessarily bad or stupid.(1)=20
Having discarded the tolerance camouflage, we can turn to meaningful =
discussion on the merits of different salvation claims.=20
If there is only one God who is eternal, all-powerful, all-good, =
all-loving, all-knowing, and fully just; and He creates us in His image, =
we would be completely fulfilled if we related to Him the way He wants =
us to, in harmony with His will. As the creator from concept to =
production line, he would know the most about the perfect purpose of his =
creations. No one else could compete with him regarding his creations' =
functions or destiny. If He were to say one's destiny is determined by =
how many hot peppers he can consume, no one could bring greater =
authority or knowledge to dispute him. If He were to say that one's =
destiny is determined by how he responds to God's loving sacrifice of =
His Son on behalf of all who are separated by sin from God, He cannot be =
disputed.=20
We evaluate different salvation plans by reasonably comparing them to =
what we know about history, the world, humanity, and God's nature and =
character. Any plan that contradicts any know fact is at best =
inadequate, and at worst, completely wrong.=20
A plan depending on the fundamental goodness of humanity fails because =
it contradicts the testimony of history, insights into human nature, and =
our self-awareness of the sinfulness of humanity. A plan that saves all =
people regardless of their hatred of God contradicts both God's justice =
(sin is punished, goodness is rewarded) and God's mercy (He's too kind =
to force anyone who permanently hates Him to spend eternity in His =
loving presence). A plan that depends on God pre-empting someone's =
unique personhood and personal moral responsibility contradicts what we =
know about humans as responsible moral agents, created in God's image to =
love him with our own love, not by means of a programmed operating =
system that mimics love. A plan that annihilates those who don't go to =
heaven contradicts the fact of humanity created in God's image as =
enduring persons who have personal responsibility and endless, =
interactive consciousness. A plan proposing multiple lifetimes to work =
off one's own transgressions violates God's standard of holiness, which =
is perfect, not perfect-minus-one. A plan including all contradictory =
and mutually exclusive plans is irrational and denies God's ability and =
desire to communicate consistently and unambiguously to encourage =
repentance and faithfulness.=20
If we were to test each plan of salvation, all would fail except =
Christianity. To test each plan would be incredibly inefficient. It =
would be like having five thousand cars in a parking lot, only one of =
which has an engine, and trying every single one to find the one that =
worked. You could try 4,999 unsuccessfully and know without even turning =
the key that car 5,000 works. However, if the person who put the cars in =
the parking lot and chose the one with the engine were to tell you where =
that car is, pointed it out, led you to it, sat you in the seat, and =
even turned the key for you, people would call you a fool to insist, =
"You're too narrow-minded and intolerant. I'd rather try a few other =
cars first. I have my own ideas about where the engine is."=20
Christianity is the car with the engine. It fits the facts, makes =
sense, perfectly reflects God's nature and character, and tells the =
truth about human nature and our predicament separated from God by sin. =
If we are created in the image of the God described in the Bible, if we =
are separated from Him by our own sin, and if He loves us so much that =
He would provide Himself a sacrifice for human sin that reconciles His =
justice and mercy, wouldn't it make sense for Him to come Himself, =
demonstrate His identity and authority through His words and works, and =
then point us to the only way?=20
The truth of Christianity has significance quantumly beyond the car =
engine analogy, however. Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft affirms, =
"the point of Christianity is the living Christ. He is not an ancient =
ideal but a real person here and now, ready to barge in and transform =
our lives. . . . The love of God is the answers not only to (1) the =
quest for the supreme value. . . and to (2) the quest for the supreme =
reality. . . but it is also the answer to the third quest, the quest for =
life's deepest meaning and purpose."(2)=20
The next time someone accuses you of being intolerant of other ways, =
share the good news of the gospel with him confidently. It's the truth.=20
1. C. S. Lewis. Beyond Personality. London: Geoffrey Bles: The =
Centenary Press, 1944, pp. 5-6.=20
2. Peter Kreeft. The God Who Loves You. Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Books, =
1988, p. 29.
That's the biggest bit of hogwash I've read in some time. Full of =
'strawmen' and falsehoods.
It comes down to this, Padre: 'proof'. You can't point to anything and =
say, 'Here's 'God'. And I mean nothing. You're only fooling yourself and =
those who follow you. You are wrong about the 'God' of yours as anyone =
could be wrong about anything. Faith doesn't cut it, Padre. There either =
is a 'God', there isn't.Prove there is a 'God', and you can forget 'The =
News Hour with Jim Lehrer' or 'Lou Dobbs Tonight'. You'll be =
world-famous. Now go ahead; show this atheist proof your 'God' exists.
As for intolerence: Boy could I throw the book at you bastards with =
that one. Christians are among the most intolerant people going. (And my =
deepest apologies to those Christians who act like real Christians and =
will not put up with any type of intolerance they happen to come across. =
You are certainly out there. Just wish there were more Christians of =
your 'persuasion'.) The Christians I am personally familiar with have =
the morals and ethics of a jackal. So cut it out with the intolerant =
bit. You guys are the intolerant ones. And, made up of a lot of truly =
'crazy' people. They have to be crazy to believe half of the stuff you =
weirdos believe. And hey! What about William Tyndale. You Christians =
strangled him to death and then burned his lifeless body. And for what? =
Because the 'heretic' had the blashphemous audacity to translate the =
Bible into English! You fricken nuts. Phooey on your religion. I'm =
suffering out here like hell. In large part because of some of you =
Jesus-lovers. Phooey!
Greywolf
------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C6A2D1.744C9B80
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Dr. Tom Snyder" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:titus213@adelphia.net">titus213@adelphia.net</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:38udnbtOnuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com">news:38udnbtO=
nuxJ0C3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@adelphia.com</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><A href=3D"http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html"><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2>http://www.answers.org/apologetics/onlyway.html</FONT></A></DIV>=
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"It may be true for <U>you</U> that =
our truth is=20
only true for <U>us</U>, but <U>our</U> truth is that what is true for =
us is=20
<U>also</U> true for you, so you lose, because that's <U>our</U> =
truth, and=20
you can't apply <U>your</U> truth to <U>us</U> because that's =
<U>your</U>=20
truth!"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<CENTER>
<H3>How Can You Say Jesus Is the Only Way to God?</H3></CENTER>
<P>People who challenge Christians with "How can you say Jesus is the =
only way=20
to God?" are good at verbal camouflage, what sounds like concern for =
tolerance=20
but which is actually belief that Jesus is not qualified to declare =
the way to=20
God. Their problem is not with tolerance, but with Jesus' authority.=20
<P>Promoters of religious pluralism say it is applicable in all =
situations,=20
including religion. However, they don't really believe it. They are =
willing to=20
accept one way if they believe it is appropriate, and to listen to =
authority=20
when it is in their best interests or they have confidence in the =
authority.=20
They don't promote pluralism regarding to breathe or not to breathe =
(only one=20
way keeps someone living). They follow their employers' way of doing =
things to=20
keep their jobs. They follow detour signs held by orange-jacketed =
construction=20
workers. When it comes to religion, however, suddenly pluralism is an =
absolute=20
and anyone, such as Jesus, who is so narrow minded as to say his =
religion is=20
the only way to God, is convicted of intolerance.=20
<P>How does a Christian respond? First, show the skeptic that he is, =
himself,=20
intolerant of at least one religious view -- Christianity, which makes =
exclusive claims about salvation. Then, show him that consistent =
pluralism is=20
meaningless because by giving the same truth value to conflicting =
claims, it=20
denies truth to any claim.=20
<P>Recently a religious tolerance advocate said Christianity wasn't =
true=20
because it was intolerant. Tolerance was the only way to test =
religious truth.=20
We disagreed, offering to give evidence and reasons that Christianity =
was true=20
and what he believed was false. Immediately, he replied, "That's what =
I mean.=20
You're wrong because you judge me. Whatever anyone believes is true." =
You can=20
guess how we answered him: "Be tolerant. Don't say we're wrong. Stop =
judging=20
us. Whatever we believe is true." Realizing he had been =
self-contradictory, he=20
tried to recover, saying, "Well, it's true for you, but not for me." =
Sadly, he=20
only dug his hole deeper. We replied, "Our truth for us is that you =
don't have=20
truth. So that must be true, because it's our truth. So you're still =
wrong."=20
Frustrated, he said, "No, you don't understand. If it's true for you, =
it only=20
applies to you, not to anyone else. It's true for you, but not for =
me." We=20
couldn't resist one more round: "It may be true for <U>you</U> that =
our truth=20
is only true for <U>us</U>, but <U>our</U> truth is that what is true =
for us=20
is<U> also</U> true for you, so you lose, because that's <U>our</U> =
truth, and=20
you can't apply <U>your</U> truth to<U> us</U> because that's =
<U>your</U>=20
truth!" He finally threw up his hands and admitted that his system was =
getting=20
nowhere. What followed was an honest, friendly discussion about what =
kinds of=20
evidence and reasons it would take to qualify someone to speak with =
authority=20
about how humans can know God.=20
<P>In addition to learning about the claims of Christianity and Jesus =
Christ,=20
he learned that tolerance is only a virtue if it is applied =
appropriately, not=20
universally. C. S. Lewis explains,=20
<P>Some people say this attitude is "intolerant." "He's the sort of =
man," they=20
complain, "who thinks his own beliefs are true and everyone else's are =
wrong."=20
But after all how can any man help doing that? A man must think his =
own belief=20
true because if he didn't it would not be his belief. "Your belief"=20
<EM>means</EM> "what you think true." And if you think the thing true, =
of=20
course you must think the opposite false. But this is a very different =
thing=20
from saying that those who hold the opposite belief are necessarily =
bad or=20
stupid.<A href=3D"http://www.answers.org/#N_1_"><SUP>(1)</SUP></A>=20
<P>Having discarded the tolerance camouflage, we can turn to =
meaningful=20
discussion on the merits of different salvation claims.=20
<P>If there is only one God who is eternal, all-powerful, all-good,=20
all-loving, all-knowing, and fully just; and He creates us in His =
image, we=20
would be completely fulfilled if we related to Him the way He wants us =
to, in=20
harmony with His will. As the creator from concept to production line, =
he=20
would know the most about the perfect purpose of his creations. No one =
else=20
could compete with him regarding his creations' functions or destiny. =
If He=20
were to say one's destiny is determined by how many hot peppers he can =
consume, no one could bring greater authority or knowledge to dispute =
him. If=20
He were to say that one's destiny is determined by how he responds to =
God's=20
loving sacrifice of His Son on behalf of all who are separated by sin =
from=20
God, He cannot be disputed.=20
<P>We evaluate different salvation plans by reasonably comparing them =
to what=20
we know about history, the world, humanity, and God's nature and =
character.=20
Any plan that contradicts any know fact is at best inadequate, and at =
worst,=20
completely wrong.=20
<P>A plan depending on the fundamental goodness of humanity fails =
because it=20
contradicts the testimony of history, insights into human nature, and =
our=20
self-awareness of the sinfulness of humanity. A plan that saves all =
people=20
regardless of their hatred of God contradicts both God's justice (sin =
is=20
punished, goodness is rewarded) <U>and</U> God's mercy (He's too kind =
to force=20
anyone who permanently hates Him to spend eternity in His loving =
presence). A=20
plan that depends on God pre-empting someone's unique personhood and =
personal=20
moral responsibility contradicts what we know about humans as =
responsible=20
moral agents, created in God's image to love him with our own love, =
not by=20
means of a programmed operating system that mimics love. A plan that=20
annihilates those who don't go to heaven contradicts the fact of =
humanity=20
created in God's image as enduring persons who have personal =
responsibility=20
and endless, interactive consciousness. A plan proposing multiple =
lifetimes to=20
work off one's own transgressions violates God's standard of holiness, =
which=20
is perfect, not perfect-minus-one. A plan including all contradictory =
and=20
mutually exclusive plans is irrational and denies God's ability and =
desire to=20
communicate consistently and unambiguously to encourage repentance and =
faithfulness.=20
<P>If we were to test each plan of salvation, all would fail except=20
Christianity. To test each plan would be incredibly inefficient. It =
would be=20
like having five thousand cars in a parking lot, only one of which has =
an=20
engine, and trying every single one to find the one that worked. You =
could try=20
4,999 unsuccessfully and know without even turning the key that car =
5,000=20
works. However, if the person who put the cars in the parking lot and =
chose=20
the one with the engine were to tell you where that car is, pointed it =
out,=20
led you to it, sat you in the seat, and even turned the key for you, =
people=20
would call you a fool to insist, "You're too narrow-minded and =
intolerant. I'd=20
rather try a few other cars first. I have my own ideas about where the =
engine=20
is."=20
<P>Christianity is the car with the engine. It fits the facts, makes =
sense,=20
perfectly reflects God's nature and character, and tells the truth =
about human=20
nature and our predicament separated from God by sin. If we are =
created in the=20
image of the God described in the Bible, if we are separated from Him =
by our=20
own sin, and if He loves us so much that He would provide Himself a =
sacrifice=20
for human sin that reconciles His justice and mercy, wouldn't it make =
sense=20
for Him to come Himself, demonstrate His identity and authority =
through His=20
words and works, and then point us to the only way?=20
<P>The truth of Christianity has significance quantumly beyond the car =
engine=20
analogy, however. Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft affirms, "the =
point of=20
Christianity is the living Christ. He is not an ancient ideal but a =
real=20
person here and now, ready to barge in and transform our lives. . . . =
The love=20
of God is the answers not only to (1) the quest for the supreme=20
<EM>value</EM>. . . and to (2) the quest for the supreme =
<EM>reality</EM>. . .=20
but it is also the answer to the third quest, the quest for life's =
deepest=20
<EM>meaning</EM> and <EM>purpose</EM>."<A=20
href=3D"http://www.answers.org/#N_2_"><SUP>(2)</SUP></A>=20
<P>The next time someone accuses you of being intolerant of other =
ways, share=20
the good news of the gospel with him confidently. <EM>It's the =
truth.</EM>=20
<P><A name=3DN_1_>1. </A>C. S. Lewis. <U>Beyond Personality.</U> =
London:=20
Geoffrey Bles: The Centenary Press, 1944, pp. 5-6.=20
<P><A name=3DN_2_>2. </A>Peter Kreeft. <U>The God Who Loves You.</U> =
Ann Arbor,=20
MI: Servant Books, 1988, p. 29.</P>
<P> </P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>That's the biggest bit of hogwash I've =
read in some=20
time. Full of 'strawmen' and falsehoods.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It comes down to this, Padre: 'proof'. =
You can't=20
point to <EM>anything</EM> and say, 'Here's 'God'. And I mean=20
<EM>nothing.</EM> You're only fooling yourself and those who follow =
you. You=20
are wrong about the 'God' of yours as anyone could be wrong about=20
<EM>anything</EM>. Faith doesn't cut it, Padre. There either =
<EM>is</EM> a=20
'God',<EM> </EM>there <EM>isn't.</EM>Prove there is a 'God', and you =
can=20
forget 'The News Hour with Jim Lehrer' or 'Lou Dobbs Tonight'. You'll =
be=20
world-famous. Now go ahead; show this atheist proof your 'God'=20
exists.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>As for intolerence: Boy could I throw =
the book at=20
you bastards with <EM>tha</EM>t one. Christians are among the most =
intolerant=20
people going. (And my <EM>deepest</EM> apologies to those Christians =
who=20
<EM>act</EM> like real Christians and will not put up with =
<EM>any</EM> type=20
of intolerance they happen to come across. You are certainly out =
there. Just=20
wish there were more Christians of your 'persuasion'.) The Christians =
I am=20
personally familiar with have the morals and ethics of a jackal. So =
cut it out=20
with the intolerant bit. You guys are the intolerant ones. And, made =
up of a=20
lot of truly 'crazy' people. They <EM>have </EM>to be crazy to believe =
half of=20
the stuff you weirdos believe. And hey! What about William Tyndale. =
You=20
Christians strangled him to death and then burned his lifeless body. =
And for=20
what? Because the 'heretic' had the blashphemous audacity to translate =
the=20
Bible into English! You fricken <EM>nuts</EM>. Phooey on your =
religion. I'm=20
suffering out here like hell. In large part because of some of you=20
Jesus-lovers. Phooey!</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Greywolf</FONT></P>
<P> </P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><!-- AIA --></P></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C6A2D1.744C9B80--
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
