| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Nihilist" |
| Date: |
16 Jan 2005 06:04:59 AM |
| Object: |
My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
My brothers and sisters,
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
The modal here is "can," not "should" or "ought." As Christians, we
simply answer yes to that question, for answering no would appear to
insult God's omnipotence.
2. Does God want to convince the world that He exists?
As Christians, we simply answer yes again, for answering no would
appear to fly in the face of the existence of the Gospel and to reduce
preaching to an exercise in futility.
So clearly we Christians answer that God does indeed want to convince
the world that He exists; otherwise how might we counter the witty
retort from the mock-theistic unsaved that they will be convinced of
God's existence when He chooses to convince them and that the
preacher's "imminentizing" the will of God amounts to sheer folly?
3. Why doesn't God convince the world that He exists?
I would like to assure my fellow Christians that I am putting a lot of
thought into the answer for that rather penetrating question. I
believe I will come up with an eloquent and cogent answer that avoids
all the comical contortions of my well-meaning brethren.
The danger we face as Christians is that the above line of
questioning--dispensing with both scientific erudition and Biblical
analysis--can be used by the average six-year-old child.
My friends, I *will* find a decent answer once and for all. After I
tackle a few elementary arguments, I intend to tackle some of the more
advanced atheological arguments. Then I will attempt to develop the
first theological argument for convincing the critically minded that
God exists.
God bless you all,
Candide Nihilist
.
|
|
| User: "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
16 Jan 2005 07:40:28 AM |
|
|
"Nihilist" <e_nihilist@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8d9826c7.0501152204.42f269f@posting.google.com...
My brothers and sisters,
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
The modal here is "can," not "should" or "ought." As Christians, we
simply answer yes to that question, for answering no would appear to
insult God's omnipotence.
2. Does God want to convince the world that He exists?
As Christians, we simply answer yes again,
So he wants to but he doesn't because...... ? ..he
doesn't want to?... ... he doesn't *really* want to?...
....he is not capbable of doing what he wants?.... ?
for answering no would
appear to fly in the face of the existence of the Gospel and to reduce
preaching to an exercise in futility.
So clearly we Christians answer that God does indeed want to convince
the world that He exists; otherwise how might we counter the witty
retort from the mock-theistic unsaved that they will be convinced of
God's existence when He chooses to convince them and that the
preacher's "imminentizing" the will of God amounts to sheer folly?
3. Why doesn't God convince the world that He exists?
I would like to assure my fellow Christians that I am putting a lot of
thought into the answer for that rather penetrating question. I
believe I will come up with an eloquent and cogent answer that avoids
all the comical contortions of my well-meaning brethren.
The danger we face as Christians is that the above line of
questioning--dispensing with both scientific erudition and Biblical
analysis--can be used by the average six-year-old child.
That is why Christians are so eager to start the brain washing
before age six.
<snip>
--
rb #2187
.
|
|
|
| User: "Earle Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
17 Jan 2005 08:52:28 PM |
|
|
In article <MToGd.69886$gd.28134@twister.socal.rr.com>,
"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar@bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:
"Nihilist" <e_nihilist@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8d9826c7.0501152204.42f269f@posting.google.com...
My brothers and sisters,
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
The modal here is "can," not "should" or "ought." As Christians, we
simply answer yes to that question, for answering no would appear to
insult God's omnipotence.
2. Does God want to convince the world that He exists?
As Christians, we simply answer yes again,
So he wants to but he doesn't because...... ? ..he
doesn't want to?... ... he doesn't *really* want to?...
...he is not capbable of doing what he wants?.... ?
*
It's a puzzle, isn't it?
Epicurus answered it a long time ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? When why call him God?"
--Epicurus (341 - 270 BC)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
17 Jan 2005 10:29:32 PM |
|
|
"Earle Jones" <earle.jones@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:earle.jones-7A5E52.12522817012005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
In article <MToGd.69886$gd.28134@twister.socal.rr.com>,
"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar@bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:
"Nihilist" <e_nihilist@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8d9826c7.0501152204.42f269f@posting.google.com...
My brothers and sisters,
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
The modal here is "can," not "should" or "ought." As Christians, we
simply answer yes to that question, for answering no would appear to
insult God's omnipotence.
2. Does God want to convince the world that He exists?
As Christians, we simply answer yes again,
So he wants to but he doesn't because...... ? ..he
doesn't want to?... ... he doesn't *really* want to?...
...he is not capbable of doing what he wants?.... ?
*
It's a puzzle, isn't it?
Epicurus answered it a long time ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? When why call him God?"
--Epicurus (341 - 270 BC)
Yup, Epicurus pretty well figured it out 300 years
before Jesus.
--
rb #2187
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "George Peatty" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 01:40:05 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:52:28 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Epicurus answered it a long time ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? When why call him God?"
Epicurus is rather short sighted. The sufferings of this present evil age
pale in comparison to the glories that shall follow. When we've had ten
thousand million billion years of eternal fellowship with the Living God,
how much will the worst of today matter?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mack Lundy" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 02:34:10 PM |
|
|
"George Peatty" <pttyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
news:9d4qu09q0agdea4tglqdf1oo0l9v35lneh@4ax.com...
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:52:28 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Epicurus answered it a long time ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? When why call him God?"
Epicurus is rather short sighted. The sufferings of this present evil age
pale in comparison to the glories that shall follow. When we've had ten
thousand million billion years of eternal fellowship with the Living God,
how much will the worst of today matter?
George
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
Thanks
Mack
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Peatty" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 08:39:16 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:34:10 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
I think the Bible is a good deal more informative on the subject than is
generally thought. It is hard to imagine, in part because it is impossible
to dissociate ourselves from our sinful natures. We know: we'll be alive
in bodies that never decay, we'll eat, but not sleep, we'll worship God
regularly, we'll have opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones,
with ancestors, and some of the important people of history. (2 Sam 12:23,
Luke 16:23) We'll live in a city built by God, and have a place of our own
within that city.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mack Lundy" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 11:05:04 PM |
|
|
"George Peatty" <pttyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
news:0ipqu0p62p01646todd6q20d2dg9ma66gh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:34:10 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
I think the Bible is a good deal more informative on the subject than is
generally thought. It is hard to imagine, in part because it is
impossible
to dissociate ourselves from our sinful natures. We know: we'll be alive
in bodies that never decay, we'll eat, but not sleep, we'll worship God
regularly, we'll have opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones,
with ancestors, and some of the important people of history. (2 Sam
12:23,
Luke 16:23) We'll live in a city built by God, and have a place of our
own
within that city.
George,
I'm not sure how you get all of "we'll be alive in bodies that never decay,
we'll eat, but not sleep, we'll worship God regularly, we'll have
opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones, with ancestors, and some
of the important people of history" from Luke 16:23 and 2 Sam 12:23
Luke 16:23
In hell,[a] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away,
with Lazarus by his side.
Ok, Lazarus is with Abraham, I'll grant you that
2 Sam 12:23
But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I
will go to him, but he will not return to me."
I don't see where this has anything to do with the afterlife.
Thanks
Mack
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Peatty" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
19 Jan 2005 05:15:47 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:05:04 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
2 Sam 12:23
But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I
will go to him, but he will not return to me."
I don't see where this has anything to do with the afterlife.
David's first son by Bathsheba had just died. He is expressing his hope,
and prophesying about ours, of being reunited somewhere, someday with that
son. There is a lot of theology built around this verse. It is one of the
most comforting in Scripture.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SoT" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
19 Jan 2005 08:27:32 PM |
|
|
George Peatty wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:05:04 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
2 Sam 12:23
But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I
will go to him, but he will not return to me."
I don't see where this has anything to do with the afterlife.
David's first son by Bathsheba had just died. He is expressing his hope,
and prophesying about ours, of being reunited somewhere, someday with that
son. There is a lot of theology built around this verse. It is one of
the most comforting in Scripture.
Is there a part in there where King David expresses his remorse over
murdering Bathsheba's husband?
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Peatty" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
19 Jan 2005 10:43:47 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:27:32 -0500, SoT <sot@tioat.ath.cx> wrote:
Is there a part in there where King David expresses his remorse over
murdering Bathsheba's husband?
That would be Psalm 51
.
|
|
|
| User: "SoT" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
20 Jan 2005 02:49:24 AM |
|
|
George Peatty wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:27:32 -0500, SoT <sot@tioat.ath.cx> wrote:
Is there a part in there where King David expresses his remorse over
murdering Bathsheba's husband?
That would be Psalm 51
I don't see any mention of Uriah in that psalm.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 09:22:02 PM |
|
|
George Peatty wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:34:10 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
I think the Bible is a good deal more informative on the subject than is
generally thought. It is hard to imagine, in part because it is impossible
to dissociate ourselves from our sinful natures. We know: we'll be alive
in bodies that never decay, we'll eat, but not sleep, we'll worship God
regularly, we'll have opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones,
with ancestors, and some of the important people of history. (2 Sam 12:23,
Luke 16:23) We'll live in a city built by God, and have a place of our own
within that city.
Oh really? Of course, then there is eziekal, which says ECCLESIASTES
9:5-6, which says the dead know nothing.
Of course, it doesn't matter, since the bible is just a bunch of books
written by man.. with no special input from some imaginary friend from
above.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 09:45:16 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:39:16 -0500, George Peatty <pttyg47-1230@copper.net>
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:34:10 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
I think the Bible is a good deal more informative on the subject than is
generally thought. It is hard to imagine, in part because it is impossible
to dissociate ourselves from our sinful natures. We know: we'll be alive
in bodies that never decay, we'll eat, but not sleep, we'll worship God
regularly, we'll have opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones,
with ancestors, and some of the important people of history. (2 Sam 12:23,
Luke 16:23) We'll live in a city built by God, and have a place of our own
within that city.
What happens if your loved ones are in hell, rather than heaven?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dan Listermann" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
31 Jan 2005 05:10:05 PM |
|
|
<GodLovesMyPerfectHair@BennyHinn.org> wrote in message
news:oq0ru050pgbscim5utrsoh4njeblu13821@4ax.com...
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:39:16 -0500, George Peatty
<pttyg47-1230@copper.net>
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:34:10 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal
fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
I think the Bible is a good deal more informative on the subject than is
generally thought. It is hard to imagine, in part because it is
impossible
to dissociate ourselves from our sinful natures. We know: we'll be alive
in bodies that never decay, we'll eat, but not sleep, we'll worship God
regularly, we'll have opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones,
with ancestors, and some of the important people of history. (2 Sam
12:23,
Luke 16:23) We'll live in a city built by God, and have a place of our
own
within that city.
What happens if your loved ones are in hell, rather than heaven?
Maybe they will be simulated.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
29 Jan 2005 10:30:31 PM |
|
|
in article oq0ru050pgbscim5utrsoh4njeblu13821@4ax.com,
at
wrote on 1/18/05 4:45 PM:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:39:16 -0500, George Peatty <pttyg47-1230@copper.net>
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:34:10 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
I think the Bible is a good deal more informative on the subject than is
generally thought. It is hard to imagine, in part because it is impossible
to dissociate ourselves from our sinful natures. We know: we'll be alive
in bodies that never decay, we'll eat, but not sleep, we'll worship God
regularly, we'll have opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones,
with ancestors, and some of the important people of history. (2 Sam 12:23,
Luke 16:23) We'll live in a city built by God, and have a place of our own
within that city.
What happens if your loved ones are in hell, rather than heaven?
Or simply being with your loved ones IS Hell?
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
29 Jan 2005 10:33:05 PM |
|
|
in article 0ipqu0p62p01646todd6q20d2dg9ma66gh@4ax.com, George Peatty at
pttyg47-1230@copper.net wrote on 1/18/05 3:39 PM:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:34:10 -0500, "Mack Lundy" <malund@wm.edu> wrote:
What do you think the afterlife will be like? What is eternal fellowship?
The Bible isn't real specific on the details. If TV shows are any
indication most Americans think it will be like a Family Circus cartoon.
I think the Bible is a good deal more informative on the subject than is
generally thought. It is hard to imagine, in part because it is impossible
to dissociate ourselves from our sinful natures. We know: we'll be alive
in bodies that never decay, we'll eat, but not sleep,
or have sex
we'll worship God
regularly, we'll have opportunity to renew acquaintances with loved ones,
with ancestors, and some of the important people of history.
And hope they can give us a handout--otherwise it's back to the
dumpster diving for meals.
(2 Sam 12:23,
Luke 16:23) We'll live in a city built by God, and have a place of our own
within that city.
I don't consider a refrigerator carton a "place" by any stretch of
the imagination.
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 02:40:47 PM |
|
|
George Peatty wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:52:28 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Epicurus answered it a long time ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? When why call him God?"
Epicurus is rather short sighted. The sufferings of this present evil age
pale in comparison to the glories that shall follow. When we've had ten
thousand million billion years of eternal fellowship with the Living God,
how much will the worst of today matter?
And what evidence do you have of this 'glory that will follow'??
.
|
|
|
| User: "Earle Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 09:14:17 PM |
|
|
In article <Pd9Hd.51288$kq2.43513@twister.nyc.rr.com>,
Bob <rmoss@hvc.rr.com> wrote:
George Peatty wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:52:28 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Epicurus answered it a long time ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? When why call him God?"
Epicurus is rather short sighted. The sufferings of this present evil age
pale in comparison to the glories that shall follow. When we've had ten
thousand million billion years of eternal fellowship with the Living God,
how much will the worst of today matter?
And what evidence do you have of this 'glory that will follow'??
*
The evidence that comes from a wild-***** guess and a lot of wishful
thinking.
earle
*
"Religious liberty in a nation is as real as the liberty of
its least popular religious minority. Look not to the size
of cathedrals or even to the words on the statute books
for proof of the reality of religious freedom. Ask what is
the fate of the Protestant in Spain, the Jew in Saudi
Arabia, the Arab in Israel, the Catholic in Poland or the
atheist in the United States."
[Paul Blanshard, Address, Orlando, Florida, February
1974, from Menendez and Doerr, The Great Quotations
on Religious Freedom]
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
19 Jan 2005 02:27:33 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:40:05 -0500, George Peatty
<pttyg47-1230@copper.net> said in alt.atheism:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:52:28 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Epicurus answered it a long time ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? When why call him God?"
<snip *****>
IOW you don't have an answer to the problem from evil either.
--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious
conviction."
- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Earle Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
17 Jan 2005 08:39:00 PM |
|
|
In article <8d9826c7.0501152204.42f269f@posting.google.com>,
(Nihilist) wrote:
[... big clip ...]
My friends, I *will* find a decent answer once and for all. After I
tackle a few elementary arguments, I intend to tackle some of the more
advanced atheological arguments. Then I will attempt to develop the
first theological argument for convincing the critically minded that
God exists.
*
Sorry, Nihilist, but George Hammond (BS, MS) has already beat you to
it with his SPoG (Scientific Proof of God) which he published here
(and on quite a few other Newsgroups) recently. Google "Hammond
SPoG" (no quotes) to see it.
However, unless you have advanced degrees in Physics and Psychology,
you probably will not be able to understand it.
(Just thought I'd save you some time.)
earle
*
"Credit must be given to observation rather than theories,
and to theories only insofar as they are confirmed by
the observed facts."
--Aristotle
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Peatty" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 01:20:59 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:39:00 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Sorry, Nihilist, but George Hammond (BS, MS) has already beat you to
it with his SPoG (Scientific Proof of God) which he published here
(and on quite a few other Newsgroups) recently. Google "Hammond
SPoG" (no quotes) to see it.
However, unless you have advanced degrees in Physics and Psychology,
you probably will not be able to understand it.
I have a degree in Psychology. I think it's nonsense. It was God who
created man, not man, in any manifestation of brainpower, that reified God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 03:20:15 PM |
|
|
"George Peatty" <pttyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
news:g93qu0tcmfcbgg1he3lrpubcvt8d9ohnm1@4ax.com...
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:39:00 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Sorry, Nihilist, but George Hammond (BS, MS) has already beat you to
it with his SPoG (Scientific Proof of God) which he published here
(and on quite a few other Newsgroups) recently. Google "Hammond
SPoG" (no quotes) to see it.
However, unless you have advanced degrees in Physics and Psychology,
you probably will not be able to understand it.
I have a degree in Psychology. I think it's nonsense. It was God who
created man, not man, in any manifestation of brainpower, that reified
God.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
- Epicurus
The objective evidence is that god did not create man but that man created
god.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
18 Jan 2005 02:41:51 PM |
|
|
George Peatty wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:39:00 -0800, Earle Jones <earle.jones@comcast.net>
wrote:
Sorry, Nihilist, but George Hammond (BS, MS) has already beat you to
it with his SPoG (Scientific Proof of God) which he published here
(and on quite a few other Newsgroups) recently. Google "Hammond
SPoG" (no quotes) to see it.
However, unless you have advanced degrees in Physics and Psychology,
you probably will not be able to understand it.
I have a degree in Psychology. I think it's nonsense. It was God who
created man, not man, in any manifestation of brainpower, that reified God.
And I bet you got your degree in Psychology at a Christian University
too, where they gave you a course in Demonic possesion and exorcism.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
16 Jan 2005 11:56:07 AM |
|
|
In our last episode <8d9826c7.0501152204.42f269f@posting.google.com>,
Nihilist lept out of the bushes shouting:
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
First, he'd have to work on that "exists at all" thing...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "sanguinevikings" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
16 Jan 2005 02:54:02 PM |
|
|
Nihilist wrote:
My brothers and sisters,
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
The modal here is "can," not "should" or "ought." As Christians, we
simply answer yes to that question, for answering no would appear to
insult God's omnipotence.
There is a massive presupposition here. Can you spot it?
2. Does God want to convince the world that He exists?
As Christians, we simply answer yes again, for answering no would
appear to fly in the face of the existence of the Gospel and to reduce
preaching to an exercise in futility.
Let us (if somewhat disingenuously) promote your presupposition to the
rank of working hypothesis. This begs the question 'Why?'
So clearly we Christians answer that God does indeed want to convince
the world that He exists; otherwise how might we counter the witty
retort from the mock-theistic unsaved that they will be convinced of
God's existence when He chooses to convince them and that the
preacher's "imminentizing" the will of God amounts to sheer folly?
'Mock theistic unsaved'? Do you mean us?
3. Why doesn't God convince the world that He exists?
I would like to assure my fellow Christians that I am putting a lot of
thought into the answer for that rather penetrating question. I
believe I will come up with an eloquent and cogent answer that avoids
all the comical contortions of my well-meaning brethren.
I thought the short answer to that was that he gave us free will.
The danger we face as Christians is that the above line of
questioning--dispensing with both scientific erudition and Biblical
analysis--can be used by the average six-year-old child.
WTF is biblical analysis? Science isn't erudition, it is intellectual
discipline.
My friends, I *will* find a decent answer once and for all. After I
tackle a few elementary arguments, I intend to tackle some of the more
advanced atheological arguments. Then I will attempt to develop the
first theological argument for convincing the critically minded that
God exists.
Promises are lies.
God bless you all,
Candide Nihilist
Let's see you examine some scientific facts and explain them, without
resorting to any kind of linguistic contortions or selectivity and
without prejudicing the outcome. In other words, dump your
presuppositions and work in an objective, factual framework. Just like
the devout bible-bashing young Christian Charles Darwin did. Do I have
to remind you where it led him?
If you fail to properly justify any of your assertions then you know
what will happen next, and how swiftly. Especially in alt.atheism.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
16 Jan 2005 09:46:44 AM |
|
|
On 15 Jan 2005 22:04:59 -0800, (Nihilist) wrote:
My brothers and sisters,
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
2. Does God want to convince the world that He exists?
The very fact that there are atheists in the first place indicates
that if God exists, the answer to at least one of those questions must
be "no", by default.
3. Why doesn't God convince the world that He exists?
Because he doesn't.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
16 Jan 2005 08:02:29 AM |
|
|
On 15 Jan 2005 22:04:59 -0800, (Nihilist) wrote:
My brothers and sisters,
Lol!
Gave it away right there.
atheist@home#1554
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
16 Jan 2005 09:48:25 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:02:29 GMT, wrote:
On 15 Jan 2005 22:04:59 -0800, (Nihilist) wrote:
My brothers and sisters,
Lol!
Gave it away right there.
I'd have thought that the inclusion of alt.atheism.satire and the name
"Candide Nihilist" would be more than sufficient... ;-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
16 Jan 2005 06:44:28 AM |
|
|
On 15 Jan 2005, Nihilist dropped trou, farted, whirled, then shouted:
My brothers and sisters,
1. Can God convince the world that He exists?
The modal here is "can," not "should" or "ought." As Christians, we
simply answer yes to that question, for answering no would appear to
insult God's omnipotence.
Answering "no" would only insult your own belief. The correct answer to
the question would be "yes", since he is supposedly omnipotent and
omnipresent. The fact that he does not casts a serious shadow of doubt
on your belief system. And the fact the he apparently relies on idiot
savant christian bleaters to spread his word speaks lowly of his desire
to save mankind - as the story goes.
2. Does God want to convince the world that He exists?
As Christians, we simply answer yes again, for answering no would
appear to fly in the face of the existence of the Gospel and to reduce
preaching to an exercise in futility.
The problem here is that he places his trust in those who cannot complete
the job. He has a wonderful story to tell, about the birth of his son,
who has been sent to save mankind from the fires of hell, and who does he
tell? A small group of shepherds. How stupid can you get? Why didn't
he give the message to a king, who would have the manpower to spread the
word worldwide, or at least region-wide, with messengers on chariots and
fast stallions in numbers much greater than those illiterate moronic
shepherds.
So clearly we Christians answer that God does indeed want to convince
the world that He exists; otherwise how might we counter the witty
retort from the mock-theistic unsaved that they will be convinced of
God's existence when He chooses to convince them and that the
preacher's "imminentizing" the will of God amounts to sheer folly?
You're projecting now. Does your doctor know of this behavior? Do you
even have a doctor?
3. Why doesn't God convince the world that He exists?
I would like to assure my fellow Christians that I am putting a lot of
thought into the answer for that rather penetrating question. I
believe I will come up with an eloquent and cogent answer that avoids
all the comical contortions of my well-meaning brethren.
But the fact is you can not.
The danger we face as Christians is that the above line of
questioning--dispensing with both scientific erudition and Biblical
analysis--can be used by the average six-year-old child.
Unfortunately for you, the average six-year-old child will, upon learning
of your belief in a first-cause creator god, ask "who created the god?"
My friends, I *will* find a decent answer once and for all. After I
tackle a few elementary arguments, I intend to tackle some of the more
advanced atheological arguments. Then I will attempt to develop the
first theological argument for convincing the critically minded that
God exists.
Good luck. You'll have to turn a blind eye to logic, for simple logic
debunks your religion hands down. Not to mention modern science, which
debunks every scientific claim the bible makes.
Why do you prefer to live your life in a fantasy world?
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
--------
Why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you
wouldn't want to ***** in the first place?
--George Carlin
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "satyr" |
|
| Title: Re: My conversion to Christianity (part 9) |
25 Jan 2005 04:39:47 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:22:43 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 15 Jan 2005 22:04:59 -0800, (Nihilist) wrote:
My brothers and sisters,
You mean your mother and father.
Brethren and Cistern.
--
satyr #1953
Chairman, EAC Church Taxation Subcommittee
Director, Gideon Bible Alternative Fuel Project
Supervisor, EAC Fossil Casting Lab
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
