CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Well if they're not changing anybody's mind, why should they stop? Campaigning and standing up for beliefs is all about enduring the critism and marching on until an ultimatum is reached that is in support of the camaigners. Until then, Christians will continute to campaign for what is right.
True Christians will campaign for what is right, right as in according to what God has commanded. How can one go wrong with the ten commandments? They are simple and straight forward. "Thou shalt not kill". That is all they need to go by in their campaigns against abortion, how can their definition of "right" be wrong then it goes by those four words?
NOW we have a big-ass argument ;) I disagree. A woman who is pregnant has a child inside her; this is life, which (if not murdered/aborted) will be welcomed into this world 9 months later and grow into a person, like you, like me. A heartbeat is present after only a couple weeks, fingers, toes, ears, they are all there just like on myself and anyone else (bar those who are missing a finger or toe etc). If a baby lying in a woman's stomach goes on to become a person such as you and I with a heartbeat it has the right to live.
It isn't. It has the potential to be so. It isn't technically alive. Why do you think they give you a certain amount of time to abort it before it's two late? A pregnant woman has 3-4 months to abort the thing. Within that time period, it isn't alive.
"A heartbeat is present after only a couple weeks, fingers, toes, ears, they are all there just like on myself and anyone else"
This still doesn't indicate life. The child is developing, yes, but it still isn't alive. It's just a composition of cells.
When you say that she has a certain amount of time to abort it, that is correct. But if the time period you gave is the time period some women choose, they are aborting a child that already has a heartbeat. Doesn't that mean something? All living things have a heartbeat! When a man is injured, a medic will feel for his pulse; if there is a heartbeat, he will hurry and get him to a hospital. Life is precious, the heartbeat counts for something - it counts for life. The life of an individual who has every right to live.
"Says you. But that doesn't make the difference."
Well, it does to be honest. When the world tells me no, I say yes 10x louder. The same goes for the Christians who campaign against abortion; they believe it does make the difference. If it didn't, there wouldn't be people telling them to "stfu".
A heartbeat, fingers, toes and ears DOES indicate life.
Granted, the heart is needed to survive, but a pulse alone doesn't mean life. The heart is very much an independent organ and can function by itself outside the body. The true driving force behind the body, the brain, is the key difference between what is living and what is an empty cell shell. On that note, the brain isn't even fully developed at 25 weeks. Nothing can truly be considered alive or "life" until it is independent from its host. Until birth, the developing fetus is nothing more than a symbiote. Barely a step up from a parasite.
Just because I'm not giving in, no need to get snappy. Have YOU ever had a child inside you? Ever felt it kick? Felt its presence at 3 months? 2 months? Have you? Of course you haven't, you are male. Unless of course you requested a womb be planted inside of you and you concieved that way.
I'm not. You're reading too much into my responses.
"Have YOU ever had a child inside you? Ever felt it kick? Felt its presence at 3 months? 2 months? Have you?"
Honestly, no. Then again, I'm not female so if I did, thee would something seriously wrong with me. Regardless, involuntary kicks don't mean anything. Just developing nerves at work.
Let me make a bet. I bet that in the future, if and when you have a child, you will realize that your child is alive when you place your hand over her stomach and feel it kick, when you look at the scan and see its tiny form curled up, when you feel it respond to your voice through your hand.
Back to the argument! "babies move inside the womb as they develop, stretching and flexing as they grow, reacting to sounds, their mother's emotions, foods the mother consumed, and the position their mother is in." So no, not "just developing nerves at work", it is much more than that. Babies react/kick to voices, emotions, sounds and so much more.
That's too big of an assumption. I don't plan on having children. If I do, fine. If I don't, Great!
"you will realize that your child is alive when you place your hand over her stomach and feel it kick, when you look at the scan and see its tiny form curled up, when you feel it respond to your voice through your hand."
Sorry missy, but unlike you, I won't let emotional bias get in the way of logical thought.
"So no, not "just developing nerves at work", it is much more than that. Babies react/kick to voices, emotions, sounds and so much more."
Natural stimuli. Common in every organism and very predictable in a developing organisms. Regardless, it is still not alive. Not until it's independent of its host.
"Natural stimuli. Common in every organism and very predictable in a developing organisms. Regardless, it is still not alive. Not until it's independent of its host"
Our opinions differ immensly here. A baby with a heartbeat, toes, fingers, ears and the ability to move around within its "host's" (mother's) womb is most certainly alive.
Hallow, a fetus meets all the characterists on a scientific level for being a living thing. They develop, just as babies outside the womb do. They take in nutrients, just as babies outside the womb do. They react to discomfort and pain as well as to its mother's emotions, diet, sounds and positions. Furthermore, the child has sleep patterns independent from its mothers. Their hearts pump their own blood supply also. Their internal organs begin to function as they grow including their brain and nervous system. That is factual.
"I find it amusing that you didn't actually say anything about the facts lol."
I'm sure you did. Regardless, they were facts and that's what I find amusing about christians. They'll ignore all logic and facts until they support their cause or point of view.
But I had just offered a whole bunch of facts? That surely credited for something, especially since they have been scientifically proven?
This is going round in circles, it has been ... interesting debating with you but I think this has taken a negative bickering turn when initially it was planned to be a mature debate.
For the record, Christians don't ignore all logic and facts. You however make accusations that are false and extreme, which is not such a good thing when the oppisition asks you for proven statistics to back up these extreme and false accusations. You seem to have met the wrong kind of Christians, which has clearly distorted your views. Not all Christians are bad, just the same as not all Muslims are bad, or all Jews or any other religion or belief. I have met many well-mannered, kind, thoughtful and caring athiests, and I am not stupid enough as to count all athiests into the same basket and insult them, just because I do not share their belief. Do us that same kindness, and realize that in every group, religion, country, city, street, there is always a bad guy.
"When the world tells me no, I say yes 10x louder."
That must be the logic the Westboro Baptist Church uses. That would also explain why everybody hates them.
"If it didn't, there wouldn't be people telling them to "stfu"."
That doesn't mean they're making a difference. It just means they're overstepping their limits. That one of the major problems christians have: Minding their own business.
"That must be the logic the Westboro Baptist Church uses. That would also explain why everybody hates them"
No, its the logic of someone who has something worth standing up for. A passionate faith that you probably wouldn't understand.
"It just means they're overstepping their limits. That one of the major problems christians have: Minding their own business."
You are oozing bitterness, you know that? No, they should not mind their own business, this is not a world for athiests so we will not let you push us down. Some Christians may over step their limits, but so do athiests? Any type of person may have that problem, not just a selection of Christians.
Yes, I gathered as much which is why I selected the word "bitterness".
"From your narrow perspective perhaps"
Ok enough of the insults, we are not in pre-school.
"And that is why they are seen as an irritant by everyone else."
Everyone else? Provide statistics and evidence that is both factual and proven before stating something as extreme as that.
"This is not your world either. Your beliefs are no longer the dominant."
Nor did I say such a thing. I am simply stating that athiests do not have the right to push Christians down for standing up for their faiths. You wouldn't like it if a Christian came into an athiest gathering you were attending and started to tell you how irritating you all were and how your non-belief system is stupid so why should Christians take the punches and sit down? Perhaps we want to keep standing up for what we believe in, or die trying.
"Yes, I gathered as much which is why I selected the word "bitterness"."
Very arrogant aren't you?
"Everyone else? Provide statistics and evidence that is both factual and proven before stating something as extreme as that."
Granted, it was a broad assumption. Still doesn't change the fact that most people don't like their personal business to be interrupted by religious dogma.
"You wouldn't like it if a Christian came into an athiest gathering you were attending and started to tell you how irritating you all were and how your non-belief system is stupid"
Since when do atheists have gatherings? On that note, when was the last time you ever saw atheists protesting outside of a church?
"so why should Christians take the punches and sit down?"
Like I said, they should expect it for trying to intervene in others' personal affairs.
"Perhaps we want to keep standing up for what we believe in, or die trying."
LOL, well thats something I've never been called before!! First time for everything I suppose.
"when was the last time you ever saw atheists protesting outside of a church?"
The last time I went to a church was when I was a very small girl, so I am unable to answer that question.
"Like I said, they should expect it for trying to intervene in others' personal affairs."
That is how you see it, and how they see it, but not how God sees it, and that is what is important to Christians, as well as the lives of the children that are being aborted.
How is that a problem? Is your opinion the supreme of all? I wouldn't think so, more likely you are just expressing your own self righteous conjecture. I have never witnessed a single post of yours with any substance or supporting evidence. Typical of secular arbitration.
Don't Christians have every right to speak out against abortion. Those laws that allow abortion are similar to the laws that protect free speech. And those laws are based on "God" given rights.
At least we are fighting for something we belivie in. If the mother didn't want to have the child then she should have had safe sex instead of thinking something along the lines of'it will never happen to me'. I have a 17 year old sister who is a junior in highschool who is now pregnant because she wasn't safe. She understands that this is part of the consequences of her choice. Yes, condoms break and pills don't always work, but then all the woman has to do is put it up for adoption. So,her body will get big and what not, get over it! Abortion is moraly wrong and it makes me sick to think that so many of the American people are for killing an innocent child. Have you ever seen a video of an abortion? I have. It is sick, It made me physically ill. The child was SCREAMING as it was sucked from its mother. Its limbs were TORN off its body for heavens sake! And we think this is ok?! Are you ok with China killing girls because they cannot continue the family name then?
"At least we are fighting for something we belivie in."
Couldn't care less and neither does anyone else.
"If the mother didn't want to have the child then she should have had safe sex instead of thinking something along the lines of'it will never happen to me'."
Too bad
"I have a 17 year old sister who is a junior in highschool who is now pregnant because she wasn't safe."
Tell her to abort it.
"She understands that this is part of the consequences of her choice."
So? She can still abort it.
"Abortion is moraly wrong and it makes me sick to think that so many of the American people are for killing an innocent child."
XD Whatever helps you sleep at night.
"Have you ever seen a video of an abortion?"
Yes. It was delicious.
"I have. It is sick, It made me physically ill."
Does it hurt to be that weak?
"The child was SCREAMING as it was sucked from its mother. Its limbs were TORN off its body for heavens sake!"
That makes it even better :)
"Are you ok with China killing girls because they cannot continue the family name then?"
It's their choice, not yours. You christians have a serious problem with minding your own business.
We are not forcing them to make our choice we merely protest their poor decisions. Is their anything wrong with that? No we don't tell you how you have to live or force you to do things rather we attempt to change your mind about what we believe are poor decisions. Your callous disregard of a child's life is challenging. Imagine if your mother had aborted you? And don't just say well then I wouldn't know. think about it deeper than that.
That's kind of what I meant when I referred to you as a "Minor Irritant". You're not going to change anyone's mind. No amount of rationality or evidence will change someone's mind. Christians are a grade-A example of that.
"we attempt to change your mind about what we believe are poor decisions."
It should have been made clear by now that nobody but you cares about what you believe.
"Imagine if your mother had aborted you?"
Then I wouldn't be here. I don't care. Try another argument. That one's run its course. It makes no point.
This is the poisonous mindset atheists have. They loose the meaning of love. They choose to live as matter and disregard the spirit. We as Christians, followers of Jesus Christ live as matter and spirit. If you do not have love living in your life then where is love in your life?
This is a problem and I see it in your heart. You wouldn't care if your mother aborted you? If my mother aborted me I would be deeply saddened for her. I would pray that my father forgive her and that she finds Jesus in her life. Now if I were an animal I wouldn't care because I wouldn't know, and the purpose of life is for reproduction. But I'm not. Thats what the huge difference is between you and me. I am not just a creation of God, I am a son of God. I have been resurrected into another world, because Jesus Christ resurrected me.
What I am speaking is reality. Jesus Christ died on the cross for you, to forgive your sins. If you believe that he died and rose again, and that he defeated death then you will be saved. You are no longer burdened by your sins. And when you live this new life in Jesus Christ you will see the world for what it really is and you will see God for who he really is. And he will fix what is broken in you and heal you. He will build you up and humble you. You will be full of love and happiness. You will never see life the same because you have seen reality. Nature does not agree with this, because we were apart of nature when we were not sons of light. Living in your natural self, brings you death. Living in Christ, Christ living in you brings you life.
You're not going to change anyone's mind. No amount of rationality or evidence will change someone's mind. Christians are a grade-A example of that.
So now you assume to have knowledge that no one has changed their mind because of the arguments Christians brought up. That is some huge conjecture there. Are you really that ignorant?
It should have been made clear by now that nobody but you cares about what you believe.
What are your statistics on this? That's what I thought.
Then I wouldn't be here. I don't care. Try another argument. That one's run its course. It makes no point.
It does make a point. If you were aborted then you would have never existed. Think about the millions of sperm that have the chance to fertilize an egg. The percentages are minute then you add the survival rate of sperm that can reach the egg. If you manage to become that conceived child then you have to worry about your mother wanting to murder you. Consider yourself very fortunate to be existent.
Exactly, we respect your voice so respect ours. And people like you should start to think about what the child's thoughts are. It will never grow up, have dreams or reach for the stars. We want to stand up for the child's rights, just as you stand for woman's rights.
Have you ever consitered what would happen if no one ever stood up for what they believed what was right? We would be mindless rats under the control of a monarch because no one would stand up to them. We would have no freedom and no liberty. America would never have been founded and may never have even been found!
I did tell my sister about these things, thank God she doesn't agree with abortion!
Why would she abort when it was her choice to have unprotected and unsafe sex?
Abortion is morally wrong, we are killing inocent children who have done nothing wrong and who cannot fight for themselves.
The video of abortion was delicious? Really? How can something so sad and disgusting be delicious?
I am not weak because I am connected to my humanity and have compassion for these poor babies who's only crime is being conseived by their parents.
How can a baby screaming and haveing it's arms and legs torn from it's body make it better?
I am not suggesting that it is our place to change what is happening in China,but I can have an opinion about it and feel bad for those poor babies. These children have no voice, they are completely dependent on their mother and father who want to kill them! This is worse than abuse! It's the worse kind of murder. We know full well what we are doing, we show more compassion to the animals we use in experaments!
I was born two and a half months early and at that age a child can still be aborted, my mother almost died giveing birth to me, but my parents didn't abort me. I am alive because of their compassion.
America needs to think about what it is doing to our children.
Wow...that is just sad, you have nothing more to say so you just say I bore you and I no longer have your attention. It seems I cannot change your mind on this issue, fine. But don't call me overly-biased without showing some support for it.
Here's the thing, we are in a violent minded nation, and world right now,and change that and have the funds going into killing humans,and putting them in bondage and the space programs redirected to the humans that needed it abortions would at the same time will decrease as a cause, and effect. Humans would also be able to afford Upper cervical specific care as described on www.upcspine.com too, a good kind of Chiropractic. All of all ages would be wise to be evaluated by one. Then love all,and not be a drunkard being in your right mind,and have your soul saved for better things than what this planet has to offer circling a star that will one day die like us.
They can moan and groan all they want but when you come right down to it, it's just some club that has some opinion about the real world and they want things done the way that their club would do it. How about that club just follows its own rules?
Abortion isn't an easy choice to make to begin with, the campaigns hurt these women. And personally they're really annoying, because they over exaggerate everything about it. Abortion is a choice, and we have the right to have it.
Numbers 5:11-5:31 describes a method of abortion used by priests in the Old World.
In the book, it is condoned by the word of God, that if a man is overcome with jealousy, even with no evidence whatsoever, and believes that his wife has slept with another man, that the priest should give her "bitter water" that causes miscarriage.
This is the end of the Christian anti-abortion argument, because also, it is spoken in the SAME BIBLE that you support, that if a man and woman fight, and a miscarriage is caused, then the husband of the woman may charge a fee to the other person for the miscarriage. The punishment IS NOT the same as the one for MURDER.
So there ya go, two separate parts of the bible saying "abortion is not murder" and "abortion is okay"... So think about that before you go out and hold up signs.
Then can't you also say: "If God has planned the life of every living thing down to the very moment of their demise, should Christians protesting against abortions not be part of this plan?"
If everything in the world is part of God's plan and is predetermined by God, the outcome would be:
(1) You shouldn't criticise anything, because to criticise anything would be to criticise God's plan... BUT
(2) You can't criticise anything except what God has planned for you to criticise, because God has planned out your every thought and act and it's impossible for you to go against this plan... THEREFORE
(3) There's no point worrying about what you should or shouldn't do. It's all out of your control anyway. You'll just keep plodding along to God's will obediently like a robot.
(By the way, Christians generally don't believe that God has the future entirely planned out, as that is thought to lead to the absurd scenario I just sketched. They tend to believe that humans have genuine free will.)
Then can't you also say: "If God has planned the life of every living thing down to the very moment of their demise, should Christians protesting against abortions not be part of this plan?"
Yes , you could and that is the point. I wished to expose a glaringly apparent contradiction and have some Christians explain it to me. I've been involved in debates with Christians and find myself frustrated at the lack of response when faced with the futility of free will in the face of an omniscient creator. I hoped to get an impassioned response to this.
God does plan everything to happen a certain way. That way is shown in the life of Jesus in the bible. God's will rather than ours. But when we sin or break God's law we then go against and essentially change the plan. In essence there is a plan but God does not enforce his will until judgement day. Then wherever somebody went against God's law/plan they will be held accountable.
God does plan everything to happen a certain way. VS we then go against and essentially change the plan
Epic contradiction, Do Christians really believe that God is all-knowing and all-powerful. It seems to me that you don't, by your responses. It is impossible for God when he created you in his omnipotence not to have known in his omniscience every available path there could have been and every "choice" you will make, it is therefore impossible to deviate from the plan as you are simply a toy, robot, puppet whichever suits.
In essence there is a plan but God does not enforce his will until judgement day. Then wherever somebody went against God's law/plan they will be held accountable.
Judgment day, isn't that the prophesied inevitable day that is coming no matter what anyone does? Isn't there like a select few, that will be chosen and where do the rest go? I was under the impression that the heavens would join the earth and Satan would be destroyed. If you believe that we are hurtling towards this day, then isn't all the praying and adherence to dogma irrelevant?
This is a good way to think about it too. Christ's life was perfect and we are supposed to follow his example, but we are human and make mistakes. Although I don't agree that our lives have a set way they are planned out by God I do agree that we stray from the PATH he wants us to follow. Abortion is just another shiney object just off the path that seems good on the outside but once your in it is not so good anymore and it is hard to find the light again. Like in J.R.R Tolken's book the hobbit when Bilbo and his companions stray from the path in the forest and cannot find the path again.
find myself frustrated at the lack of response when faced with the futility of free will in the face of an omniscient creator. I hoped to get an impassioned response to this.
I have told you before omniscient doesn't mean intervention. We know God loves all of us, that does not mean that knowing we would do evil that he wouldn't create us. Your reasoning is ridiculous, you can't even begin to comprehend God's love for anyone. No one can fully comprehend God's reasons. You can keep repeating your arbitrary statements, but it won't change the logic of the argument. God loves us and always will.
I have told you before omniscient doesn't mean intervention.
Fair enough, I've never stated that it does. This comment just goes to show that you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, and therefore can only see my reasoning as ridiculous, so don't preach your babble to me. I know all about "Gods love" I was once a believer like you.
Also, isolating one off the cuff point I made to a previous debater and typing your defensive remarks is not debating, formulate an argument or something.
You can keep repeating your arbitrary statements, but it won't change the logic of the argument. God loves us and always will.
And you can keep repeating yours, the difference is what I believe does not require a leap of faith, is based in sound logic and proved ideas, not the contradicting ramblings of desert goat herders from the bronze age. I'll keep plugging away until someone can explain the contradictions to me, you obviously can't otherwise you'd have made points other than things that amount to "God loves us, so there" or "freewill exists and does not clash with God's omniscience, because the bible says so"
This comment just goes to show that you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, and therefore can only see my reasoning as ridiculous, so don't preach your babble to me. I know all about "Gods love" I was once a believer like you.
Your entire argument is arbitrary. You just restate your opinions over and over. You don't have one single evidence to support your opinion. Furthermore you were never a believer like me. You are far too weak minded and susceptible to the constant changing beliefs of men. If you ever had true faith and understood what God has revealed to us, then you wouldn't keep repeating the same elementary logic that you use. I have told you before that God's omniscience doesn't mean that He wouldn't create us.
1 Peter 1: 20
He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.
He always knew that we would do evil, but His love is why He still made us. You shouldn't dare to assume to know the intricacies of God.
You just restate your opinions over and over. You don't have one single evidence to support your opinion.
What sort of evidence are you looking for, or will accept. Furthermore where is yours, the burden of proof is in your corner not mine.
Furthermore you were never a believer like me. You are far too weak minded and susceptible to the constant changing beliefs of men.
You're right, I was never a believer like you, I read and understood the oppositions work and realized that they had so much darn evidence that I'd better leave the dogma at the door. I think it is you who is weak minded though, unable to process a finite existence, afraid of actually being that which you are, an animal, a smart one but an animal none the less. Indoctrinated, and bound by a book written by men that did not understand our universe.
If you ever had true faith and understood what God has revealed to us, then you wouldn't keep repeating the same elementary logic that you use.
If I believed like you I wouldn't be able to see the argument either and probably think the same. Blind faith is hard to explain, I know.
I have told you before that God's omniscience doesn't mean that He wouldn't create us.
Here we go again, firstly, you telling me does not make anything valid, secondly I didn't state this and it's your inability to process the information that leads you to make comments like this. Thirdly this point in senseless.
He always knew that we would do evil, but His love is why He still made us. You shouldn't dare to assume to know the intricacies of God.
His love doesn't take from the fact that he knew would create evil, and then senselessly punish for it.
I don't think you understand what arbitrary means. You entire response is full of your opinions and feelings, not one of which is supported by any other material. If your perception is the only one like it, then perhaps you must reconsider if it is even valid.
What sort of evidence are you looking for, or will accept. Furthermore where is yours, the burden of proof is in your corner not mine.
My evidence is the inerrant word of God. For you to even have a standing in this argument you must provide some kind of support for your opinion. I am sure there are secular Bible scholars that must share your ideas.
You're right, I was never a believer like you, I read and understood the oppositions work and realized that they had so much darn evidence that I'd better leave the dogma at the door.
If you refer to Biblical accounts as dogma, then you never understood the word or believed in it as truth. Therefore it is arguable that you never really believed in the first place.
I think it is you who is weak minded though, unable to process a finite existence, afraid of actually being that which you are, an animal, a smart one but an animal none the less.
So many fallacies in that short sentence there. You speak of finite existence, yet naturalism can't and will never explain origins. If you truly believe the universe is dying (heat death which is observable) then you should know that matter can't come into existence on its own. So without supernatural creation matter itself can't exist.
As far as animals go, we can argue about quadrupedal apes if you want. But it is much easier to ask "where is your transitions?" If you want to argue about fossils then we can, but be warned I get much enjoyment out of disproving evolutionists.
If I believed like you I wouldn't be able to see the argument either and probably think the same. Blind faith is hard to explain, I know.
Blind faith is origins through naturalism. Biblical faith has reasoning and logic, plus multitudes of witnesses of the accounts. Naturalism has no witnesses and it doesn't follow scientific law.
Here we go again, firstly, you telling me does not make anything valid, secondly I didn't state this and it's your inability to process the information that leads you to make comments like this. Thirdly this point in senseless.
Your point was to say God is evil due to His omniscience that a creation containing evil meant He is the originator of evil. Yet you fail to realize that evil is defined by defying God's law. Therefore He wouldn't create evil as it would be a contradiction upon Himself.
His love doesn't take from the fact that he knew would create evil, and then senselessly punish for it.
God can't contradict Himself, therefore the punishment for sin is just as it is the violation of God's law.
I don't think you understand what arbitrary means.
I can see from the composition of my sentence where you'd get this idea, but I'm well aware of what arbitrary means, what I meant is that you label them thus because you need some sort of proof for what is a basic logical premise.
You entire response is full of your opinions and feelings, not one of which is supported by any other material.
Religious scripture is open to anyone's interpretation hence the massive amount of schisms. It is anyone's take on an ancient book and I provide mine, also I'm not the only person that thinks these things.
My evidence is the inerrant word of God For you to even have a standing in this argument you must provide some kind of support for your opinion. I am sure there are secular Bible scholars that must share your ideas.
You can't label God's word inerrant, God is unproven, so the so called word of God can't be taken as infallible in a logical debate. God's word is as I've already stated is up to the individual to interpret, and secular biblical scholars, really.
If you refer to Biblical accounts as dogma, then you never understood the word or believed in it as truth. Therefore it is arguable that you never really believed in the first place.
This makes no sense, do you know what dogma is, the point that you are disputing means that I let go of the rules to which I was bound. It is within your comments that I can see your inability to accept that a true Christian would abandon their beliefs.
So many fallacies in that short sentence there. You speak of finite existence, yet naturalism can't and will never explain origins.
Origins of life? Origins of the Universe? which are you referring to, to boldly state that something will never happen is in itself folly. There is so much known, but so much more to be known, to squeeze God into every gap impedes progress.
If you truly believe the universe is dying (heat death which is observable) then you should know that matter can't come into existence on its own.
Matter does come into existence, it is observable by the effect it has on atoms, called virtual particles they are provable and have been proved without a doubt, meriting the Nobel prize in physics to Willis lamb in the 50s. Steven Hawking has shown that particle and anti-particles are created out of energy and the energy that creates matter is positive which is counter affected by gravitational forces that lead positive particles to be attracted to each other, two particles that are closer have less energy than two that are further apart as they have to use energy to repel each other in the presence of gravity leading to a universal energy of 0 thus matter does come into existence all the time, but anti matter also does and they cancel each other out.
As far as animals go, we can argue about quadrupedal apes if you want. But it is much easier to ask "where is your transitions?" If you want to argue about fossils then we can, but be warned I get much enjoyment out of disproving evolutionists.
What would you accept as a transitional fossil, there are many, Goggle Australopithecus or anything in the Homo lineage. What you are looking for can't exist there is never going to be a fossil that doesn't create two more gaps in the eyes of evolutionary deniers. To understand evolution is to know that there has to be countless gradations from one form to another, there are plenty of Fossils that prove evolution such as tiltaalik, archeopteryx or the aforementioned fossils of homo habilis and their like, or even living beings such as platypus, or the fact that a whale has hind limbs etc. You only need to look at the effects man has had in a very short space of time on animals and plants used in agriculture, cattle, sheep, dogs (which would not exist at all) corn, bananas etc. All of these things, evolved into different forms by the hand of man due to selective breeding.
Blind faith is origins through naturalism. Biblical faith has reasoning and logic, plus multitudes of witnesses of the accounts. Naturalism has no witnesses and it doesn't follow scientific law.
Biblical witnesses are not evidence of anything, most accounts of Jesus were written by men that did not even live at the same time as Jesus. The old testament goes completely against scientific knowledge, and the "morals" of the Bible are dubious at best, permitting Genocide, rape and fillicide. Also Naturalism in the methodological sense is scientific law, it is in essence the scientific method. A method that sees natural phenomena explained through experiment, the bible is one book, it can't and does not accurately describe the origins of anything. The Adam and Eve story is laughable, and the view of the earth as an entity less than ten thousand years old is completely disproved. Also the genetic diversity of man can not be explained by the combination of genes of two or so people.
Your point was to say God is evil due to His omniscience that a creation containing evil meant He is the originator of evil. Yet you fail to realize that evil is defined by defying God's law. Therefore He wouldn't create evil as it would be a contradiction upon Himself.
Evil is defined by man, god's laws are a creation of man, a primitive method to police the ignorant, yet again there is no evidence of God's existence, none. By the way it is a contradiction, one of many.
God can't contradict Himself, therefore the punishment for sin is just as it is the violation of God's law.
I think you'll find that God presents many contradictions, I've already provided you with an explanation as to why, but you argue that there is no grounding in my statements, there doesn't need to be, as I infer that God is fictitious then your evidence of the Bible is in valid, as the unprovable words of men.
what I meant is that you label them thus because you need some sort of proof for what is a basic logical premise.
Logic would be the derivative of the average person would comprehend from the interpretation. Your logic lies purely in your opinion of the scriptures, not the actual interpretation that is agreed upon by Biblical scholars.
Religious scripture is open to anyone's interpretation
That is false, their is a method in how to interpret them. False prophets and non-Biblical translations will never be widely accepted.
also I'm not the only person that thinks these things.
Yet, you have cited no such person.
You can't label God's word inerrant, God is unproven
And who are you to make such a claim? You are one person who "feels" that the Bible was not the inspired word of God. For you to state this as matter of fact then you had better have some substantial evidence. If not then you are claiming people who number in the thousands that their experiences are invalid. To do this, you would have to be a witness to these people and the supposed occurrences. Since you aren't that old, then your position is that of assumption and conjecture based on "what you want to be true". I believe the accounts in the Bible, and it is relatively easy to accurately interpret God's word.
It is within your comments that I can see your inability to accept that a true Christian would abandon their beliefs.
Exactly, no one who is a "true" Christian would abandon their faith. The Biblical perspective is my basis, any "true" Christian begins their analysis of the world through the Bible first. You never set your heart on God's word. If you did then doubt would never have ate away your 'beliefs' like a secular cancer.
This makes no sense, do you know what dogma is,
It the the repetitious statement of a belief without adequate evidence. How then do the compilation of 66 books and thousands of eyewitnesses are not adequate?
to boldly state that something will never happen is in itself folly.
Like how you say there is no God. You believe there will be no more revelations.
Matter does come into existence, it is observable by the effect it has on atoms, called virtual particles they are provable and have been proved without a doubt,
Matter is the composition of energy and mass. It is either one or both. An electron is matter, which is in atoms.
shown that particle and anti-particles are created out of energy and the energy that creates matter is positive which is counter affected by gravitational forces that lead positive particles to be attracted to each other, two particles that are closer have less energy than two that are further apart as they have to use energy to repel each other in the presence of gravity leading to a universal energy of 0 thus matter does come into existence all the time, but anti matter also does and they cancel each other out.
This entire theory is based on the Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy. Both of which comprise matter. This does not answer the question of the original creation of the mass and energy (matter). Anti matter has not been proven much like dark matter and dark energy. They have only been hypothesized to explain discrepancies in the Big Bang theory.
What would you accept as a transitional fossil, there are many, Goggle Australopithecus or anything in the Homo lineage.
I am well aware of Lucy and the fact that she is clearly an ape. How many humans have locking wrists, curled toes and fingers, and tilted spinal base. Not to mention cranial capacity far short of human. This is an ape in every sense of the word. There is absolutely no indication of a transition.
To understand evolution is to know that there has to be countless gradations from one form to another, there are plenty of Fossils that prove evolution such as tiltaalik, archeopteryx or the aforementioned fossils of homo habilis and their like, or even living beings such as platypus, or the fact that a whale has hind limbs etc.
Tell me what are the evidences? The whale to land animal is based on a skull, not a skeleton or fossil imprints. Most of the Habilis "family" are based on fragments of bones or teeth. Tell me more of your evolutionary faith.
Biblical witnesses are not evidence of anything
And your evidence is? Wait, or is that just your opinion?
most accounts of Jesus were written by men that did not even live at the same time as Jesus.
They were written by the next generation of the Apostles. I would rely on that more then I would supposed billions of years far beyond observable history.
The old testament goes completely against scientific knowledge,
In what way is that?
Also Naturalism in the methodological sense is scientific law, it is in essence the scientific method. A method that sees natural phenomena explained through experiment
Really, can you re-create the Big Bang in a lab? Or primordial evolution into humans? No you can't and therefore it is not operational science. It is assumption based on assumptions. It is like stellar evolution which teaches billions of unobservable years based on spectroscopy.
Also the genetic diversity of man can not be explained by the combination of genes of two or so people.
Yes it can, those first two people carried the genetic variants in their DNA and reproduced to create diversity.
Evil is defined by man, god's laws are a creation of man, a primitive method to police the ignorant, yet again there is no evidence of God's existence, none. By the way it is a contradiction, one of many.
And how do you prove it is not the inspired word of God? You continually ignore those witnesses in the Bible. You discredit them based on your opinion nothing more.
I think you'll find that God presents many contradictions, I've already provided you with an explanation as to why, but you argue that there is no grounding in my statements,
What contradictions are these? There is no ground for your statements as I have rebutted them. You just refuse to acknowledge the truth.
as I infer that God is fictitious then your evidence of the Bible is in valid, as the unprovable words of men.
Ok, let me see if I can answer your quesiton. You want to know about free will,right? Well then think about this. Christ and our Heavenly father know each of us personally and know what choices we will make in this life. That does not mean that they 'force us' to make these decisions. The greatest gift from God is our agency. He will never take that away from us. No the evil in the world is not part of our God's plan, but it is part of the devils plan. Christ and God both know us and know your thoughts and our hearts. They would never 'make us' do anything. We are here to learn and if we were forced into thinking or doing a certian thing we would never learn.Things such as abortion, war, cruelty are all tools of the devil, we must NOT confuse these cruel things with our creator and our God. We are responsible for ourselves. We do have agency! We are not predestened to do anything, it is our choice what we do with our lives. Our God just knows before hand what those choices will be. We are not forced into anything.
Christ and our Heavenly father know each of us personally and know what choices we will make in this life.That does not mean that they 'force us' to make these decisions
First of all, I thought that God and Jesus were the same person. Secondly, if God knew the path you were to "choose" and created you for that reason, isn't it safe to assume that said choice is benign, seeing as he already planned your life and deviation from said path is not a deviation but the execution of his plan as it was meant to be.
No the evil in the world is not part of our God's plan, but it is part of the devils plan.
The devil himself is a creation of God, an omniscient creator has to have known before he created Lucifer how he would turn out, it is then safe to infer that God wanted to create evil and therefore is by definition. He created Lucifer as he did with everything else that exists. Besides that, look at the evidence, of which my favorite is Noah's flood, why would an omni-benevolent creator, kill so many living entities including innocent people, the elderly, the sick and retarded, children, not to mention all of the innocent animals that were obviously superfluous to requirement?
We are here to learn and if we were forced into thinking or doing a certian thing we would never learn
This is my point exactly, In the light of God's creation of the universe, nothing is learned, achieved or discovered, everything that is to be known is known by God, he then trickle feeds man this knowledge, why? Disease cure and prevention, technology is it safe to assume that people in times before were not worthy of these things, bear in mind that people are less devoted to God now than they ever were, and it is those the least devoted that are leading the way by making lives last longer, making technology easier to use, trying to develop cleaner more environmentally safe fuels.
Things such as abortion, war, cruelty are all tools of the devil, we must NOT confuse these cruel things with our creator and our God.
Tools of the devil that were created by God, don't confuse the devil with a free thinking entity, for he can not be.
We are responsible for ourselves.
This I agree with, but can't see how the religious can.
We are not predestened to do anything, it is our choice what we do with our lives.
isn't it safe to assume that said choice is benign, seeing as he already planned your life and deviation from said path is not a deviation but the execution of his plan as it was meant to be.
Your assumption is wrong. And that is the core of your argument. It is your ill-informed opinion. Omniscience doesn't translate into a pre-destination the path and choices we make our specifically ours to choose. God knows what we are going to do, this does not mean that He chose it for us.
The devil himself is a creation of God, an omniscient creator has to have known before he created Lucifer how he would turn out, it is then safe to infer that God wanted to create evil and therefore is by definition.
He did know that Satan would turn against Him. But He also loves the creation that He made. Remember the angels were there to act as agents of God, but man was made to have a relationship with Him. The fact that we recognize evil as wrong shows that God has instilled in us a sense of good. Satan is a tool used to test us. How could we truly love God and trust in Him if the world was perfect? In order for us to have a real relationship with Him, then we must stand fast and loyal to Him during hardship. God made the world perfect, but Adam rebelled and failed the very first test. And God knew that he would that is why His plan was already designed.
Job 1: 6-22
One day the members of the heavenly court came to present themselves before the Lord, and the Accuser, Satan, came with them. 7 “Where have you come from?” the Lord asked Satan.
Satan answered the Lord, “I have been patrolling the earth, watching everything that’s going on.”
8 Then the Lord asked Satan, “Have you noticed my servant Job? He is the finest man in all the earth. He is blameless—a man of complete integrity. He fears God and stays away from evil.”
9 Satan replied to the Lord, “Yes, but Job has good reason to fear God. 10 You have always put a wall of protection around him and his home and his property. You have made him prosper in everything he does. Look how rich he is! 11 But reach out and take away everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face!”
12 “All right, you may test him,” the Lord said to Satan. “Do whatever you want with everything he possesses, but don’t harm him physically.” So Satan left the Lord’s presence.
13 One day when Job’s sons and daughters were feasting at the oldest brother’s house, 14 a messenger arrived at Job’s home with this news: “Your oxen were plowing, with the donkeys feeding beside them, 15 when the Sabeans raided us. They stole all the animals and killed all the farmhands. I am the only one who escaped to tell you.”
16 While he was still speaking, another messenger arrived with this news: “The fire of God has fallen from heaven and burned up your sheep and all the shepherds. I am the only one who escaped to tell you.”
17 While he was still speaking, a third messenger arrived with this news: “Three bands of Chaldean raiders have stolen your camels and killed your servants. I am the only one who escaped to tell you.”
18 While he was still speaking, another messenger arrived with this news: “Your sons and daughters were feasting in their oldest brother’s home. 19 Suddenly, a powerful wind swept in from the wilderness and hit the house on all sides. The house collapsed, and all your children are dead. I am the only one who escaped to tell you.”
Job stood up and tore his robe in grief. Then he shaved his head and fell to the ground to worship. 21 He said,
“I came naked from my mother’s womb,
and I will be naked when I leave.
The Lord gave me what I had,
and the Lord has taken it away.
Praise the name of the Lord!”
22 In all of this, Job did not sin by blaming God.
In the light of God's creation of the universe, nothing is learned, achieved or discovered
That's false, it's because God created us that we have logic and knowledge. In a "random chance" universe logic and order wouldn't exist. Unless you propose some unknown and impossible mechanism for this? Perhaps some arbitrary statements are to be expected from you.
Tools of the devil that were created by God, don't confuse the devil with a free thinking entity, for he can not be.
Satan does have free will that is why he rebelled. He was the most powerful of the angels, but he let his arrogance lead to him being the most evil of all entities.
This I agree with, but can't see how the religious can.
Religious laws is what all ethics and morals are based on.
Now you are arguing against your own point
You really are struggling to grasp this simple concept aren't you?
Your assumption is wrong. And that is the core of your argument. It is your ill-informed opinion. Omniscience doesn't translate into a pre-destination the path and choices we make our specifically ours to choose. God knows what we are going to do, this does not mean that He chose it for us.
My assumption is not wrong, it is perfectly valid. And my opinion is far from ill-informed. Here is the crux, you can't deduce this because you can't see the contradiction even in your own words. I'll not labor the point of the contradiction as you'll say it's just arbitrary and refuse to dispute it.
God made the world perfect, but Adam rebelled and failed the very first test. And God knew that he would that is why His plan was already designed.
God made the world perfect. then why not make man perfect? He designed man with the flaws this is your argument that free will can exist. Really?
I'll not copy over your biblical copy/paste, but I'll ask this, this is meant to do what? Prove that God doesn't interfere? Surely in is evidence that he does.
That's false, it's because God created us that we have logic and knowledge. In a "random chance" universe logic and order wouldn't exist. Unless you propose some unknown and impossible mechanism for this? Perhaps some arbitrary statements are to be expected from you.
No, it's through experience that we have logic and knowledge. From where are you gleaming random chance, I didn't mention this, and this is a straw man. But seeing as you mention it, God is an unknown and impossible entity, one that is unproved, to use that as an explanation for anything is to say I really don't care about the answer and I'll not go in search of it. Also keep your assumptions to yourself mate, if my arguments seem arbitrary to you, it's because you are incapable of recognizing their significance.
Satan does have free will that is why he rebelled. He was the most powerful of the angels, but he let his arrogance lead to him being the most evil of all entities.
So, God creates Satan knowing he will one day turn, God also creates man knowing he will one day turn, God uses Lucifer to go and entice his flawed creation to go against him, he then punishes his creation for succumbing to the designed flaw, he then goes and demands his creation love him but doesn't even give them all the capacity or facility to even know him, he is then not happy with the way it all turned out so he kills them all bar a tiny chosen few, the few that then go and create the entire human race and still humans come out bad and it is there own fault. You expect people to buy that, people that are free of Christian mind policing that can actually see basic logical contradictions. If I asked you to believe that about a different set of names, you'd laugh in my face.
Religious laws is what all ethics and morals are based on.
No they're not, there is plenty of evidence to show that morality is an evolved form of reciprocal altruism.
You really are struggling to grasp this simple concept aren't you?
What simple concept? You expect me to call contradiction logic, sorry I'm not a Christian anymore.
My assumption is not wrong, it is perfectly valid.
It is not valid, in fact you miss the point entirely.
And my opinion is far from ill-informed.
If not ill-informed then willfully ignorant.
Here is the crux, you can't deduce this because you can't see the contradiction even in your own words. I'll not labor the point of the contradiction as you'll say it's just arbitrary and refuse to dispute it.
I don't recognize this contradiction, because there is no contradiction here. That is the focal point of our argument. You believe that God is evil, because of His omniscience. I believe that God is great due to His omniscience that He knows all, and that God loves us and delivered us from the evil we created. Knowing there would be evil in the creation doesn't make Him evil. Especially seeing how He designed a way for all to be redeemed. Your assumption is based on a totality of wickedness in the world. What you fail to recognize is the "true" believers that would stay loyal to God and not turn away from Him. We are all tested at one point in our lives to see through our faithfulness.
The passage from Job I showed you was to demonstrate the loyalty that God requires from us. He is the one who created everything. That creation includes free will which is what gives us the choice to do evil. God wouldn't make us to be mindless robots. How then could we have a real relationship with Him?
No, it's through experience that we have logic and knowledge. From where are you gleaming random chance, I didn't mention this, and this is a straw man.
Random molecular interactions doesn't equate experience. The fact that we can conceive and derive logic demonstrates our Creator as the originator of these laws. All that we witness with nature and astrophysics is degradation of material. A disorder of natural phenomena is was we witness not an order or evolution of material. Thereby your views of natural occurring order is not valid. The natural material would never occlude to become organized, and this fact invalidates your beliefs in the big bang and evolution. You say the idea of God is impossible, then I say your beliefs in natural organization is absurd and unobservable. These naturally occurring events we witness are due to God's creation and maintenance of what He made. Your ideas and beliefs changed because of evidence, this is not true your ideas changed due to the interpretations of that evidence. A secular interpretation of the evidence is what swayed your fragile beliefs.
Romans 8: 5-11
For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.
It is not valid, in fact you miss the point entirely.
No, I fully understand the point, I see exactly what you are saying, it's just that it is fallacy.
If not ill-informed then willfully ignorant.
Willfully ignorant, like ignoring evidence?
I don't recognize this contradiction, because there is no contradiction here.
You don't recognize it because you can't. The thought of entertaining a Godless Universe is too much for the average Christian.
You believe that God is evil, because of His omniscience. I believe that God is great due to His omniscience that He knows all, and that God loves us and delivered us from the evil we created.
I don't believe in God, I merely point out problems with accepted Dogma. This is basically bullshit though my friend, I'm starting to see that you can't ever see this as it is.
Knowing there would be evil in the creation doesn't make Him evil.
My word, again, honestly dude, this makes no sense at all, any designer that designs a creation in the knowledge that it will be evil must therefore be, call that arbitrary if you like, it is deductive reasoning.
Especially seeing how He designed a way for all to be redeemed.
How does this work for those that have not heard about God?
What you fail to recognize is the "true" believers that would stay loyal to God and not turn away from Him. We are all tested at one point in our lives to see through our faithfulness.
What you fail to see is that not everyone is born equal, and that what true believer is to you is different to someone else, you were indoctrinated with your specific Dogma, and are blind to all else.
The passage from Job I showed you was to demonstrate the loyalty that God requires from us. He is the one who created everything. That creation includes free will which is what gives us the choice to do evil. God wouldn't make us to be mindless robots. How then could we have a real relationship with Him?
It also shows God and the Devil having a bet at the expense of one of Gods most faithful followers. It also shows interference of God in the life of a man, something you claimed he didn't do.
Random molecular interactions doesn't equate experience. The fact that we can conceive and derive logic demonstrates our Creator as the originator of these laws.
What? What are you talking about? random molecular interactions! do you know anything about bio molecules, you are just making stupid statements now for the sake of it. Logic's existence is not evidence of God, it is evidence of learned experience over millions of years. Why exactly does God change the rules? Why is it deemed OK now to be cured of sickness that at one time put you in your grave in a day or two. Logic is the eventuality of experience and Logic has caught up with and surpassed religious superstition.
All that we witness with nature and astrophysics is degradation of material. A disorder of natural phenomena is was we witness not an order or evolution of material.
Ahh the old Thermodynamics nugget, I've seen this one touted by creationists before and it does not work in your favor, First of all if you want to make physical laws, (especially those at the quantum level) work on a biological system you have to apply them to the individual genes not the complex organism they produce, biological systems on doing anything including becoming more complex use energy, which exits the body as heat causing the surroundings to become less ordered, reactions like the formation of water would not appear to be spontaneous but it is, it is the spontaneous formation of order that causes the universe directly around the system to become more disordered, in the evolution of life on earth and the apparent ordering of the universe other parts are becoming more disordered. Secondly while we are on this subject Thermodynamics tells us that energy or matter can not be created or destroyed it changes form, how does this then sit with the idea that God created all, out of nothing? Did he take the energy from himself therefore becoming a weaker, less perfect being and as from your point he is now more disordered and like the rest of the Universe tending towards chaos? Hmmm....
You say the idea of God is impossible, then I say your beliefs in natural organization is absurd and unobservable.
Natural organization has been observed, evolution has been observed, it does not violate the law of entropy and therefore is more in keeping with thermodynamics than God.
These naturally occurring events we witness are due to God's creation and maintenance of what He made.
So evolution is true, and is the maintenance of the universe, but he doesn't want to maintain all of the Universe he wants it to become more chaotic is that your point, the natural tendency towards disorder is actually God keeping order?
A secular interpretation of the evidence is what swayed your fragile beliefs.
Too right it did, and you can throw digs if you wish I don't really care, here is the point though the secular part just means unbiased, and the religious interpretation is only trying to squeeze God into another gap, if this is the way the world carried on then nothing would be achieved.
Please tell me the relevance of the bible passage other than to tell me that your book thinks I'm living according to the flesh and are therefore dead. If it's not going to shed light on the debate can you please keep it out, I've read the bible, it's actually a good read and I enjoyed it both when I was a believer and not, I don't need to be reading passages from it in a debate that have nothing to do with the debate. Cheers.
How do you reconcile these two beliefs that you hold:
(1) God knows what choices we will make in the future, and
(2) We can freely make choices and our lives are not predestined?
Let me explain what's odd about it. There is a glass of water in front of me. Maybe I will drink it, maybe I will leave it alone. God knows that I'm going to drink the water. Then do I still have the choice to not drink the water?
If I decided not to drink the water, then God's knowledge would be wrong, which is impossible as God is omniscient. So it seems that the only thing I can do is decide to drink the water.
If God knew that I was not going to drink the water, the same situation would occur in reverse - I wouldn't be able to choose to drink it.
the devil represents symbolically death. He represents evil and what is dead. He lives in the earth, he shouts in our hears trying to bring us to be one with him and earth.
"the devil represents symbolically death. He represents evil and what is dead. He lives in the earth, he shouts in our hears trying to bring us to be one with him and earth."
If you have read the word of God you would know that the word of God is never out dated. It is the same as it is today, to the beginning of creation forevermore.
1Peter 24-25 All men are like grass and all their glory is like the flowers of the field, the grass withers, the flowers fall, but the word of the lord stands forever.
"If you have read the word of God you would know that the word of God is never out dated. It is the same as it is today, to the beginning of creation forevermore."
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
"1Peter 24-25 All men are like grass and all their glory is like the flowers of the field, the grass withers, the flowers fall, but the word of the lord stands forever."
If you have read the word of God you would know that the word of God is never out dated. It is the same as it is today, to the beginning of creation forevermore.
1Peter 24-25 All men are like grass and all their glory is like the flowers of the field, the grass withers, the flowers fall, but the word of the lord stands forever.
In my country (UK) we got something called "Freedom of Speech".
As usual you are not getting the point. This is not about a Christians or anyone else's rights by law, it is about the apparent contradiction of Christian teaching.
As usual you are not getting the point. This is not about a Christians or anyone else's rights by law, it is about the apparent contradiction of Christian teaching.
No, it's saying that Christians should stop campaigning against abortion.
Your argument is completely and utterly fooked up, man. Christians believe that God gives and takes life, therefore any man who attempts to take life is going against an important commandment and also pressing a button that only God has the right to press. Abortion is not about God taking life, it is about man taking life, therefore Christians who campaign against such an act are in no way disobeying God, they are doing quite the opposite; "campaigning" for what is right - they are obeying God.
Your argument is completely and utterly fooked up, man.
No, it is not, the argument is valid and logical.
Christians believe that God gives and takes life, therefore any man who attempts to take life is going against an important commandment and also pressing a button that only God has the right to press
If this is so, then God is not all powerful, plus he is not all knowing, God when making a person supposedly plans out every minute detail of their lives, this would include the Doctor carrying out the procedure, the mother going through the procedure and the unborn that is to be terminated. If your argument is true this would mean that God did not know this would happen and is therefore blind to the future, this would then make all prophecies made from God via prophets just mere guesses, which it seems they are.
When a Christian is killed, by any means they rationalize it by stating that it was the persons time to go (God's plan), if a Christian avoids death then they rationalize it by saying that it was not yet their time. By Christian beliefs every life is sacred (and that includes developing embryos) and only God knows the time of your demise, if this is true then God wishes abortions to happen as to not would deviate from the plan of an omnipotent omniscient creator, this is impossible.
Christians who campaign against such an act are in no way disobeying God, they are doing quite the opposite; "campaigning" for what is right - they are obeying God.
This is true, in the sense that their church teaches blind faith and adherence, a blind faith that requires the suspension of logic, for if you follow the teachings to any form of logical conclusion then you would see that if God possesses the powers attributed to him via the ancient texts then the texts themselves are wrong as they teach of free will, and if the texts are wrong then why follow it, as to so or not is both in violation of Gods will if you wish to remain faithful.
"If this is so, then God is not all powerful, plus he is not all knowing, God when making a person supposedly plans out every minute detail of their lives, this would include the Doctor carrying out the procedure, the mother going through the procedure and the unborn that is to be terminated. If your argument is true this would mean that God did not know this would happen and is therefore blind to the future, this would then make all prophecies made from God via prophets just mere guesses, which it seems they are."
Wrong, so wrong. You jump to false conclusions, slow down. Just because women get abortions, how does that make God non-powerful? Ever heard of cause and effect? Sin will always exist, here, there, everywhere. When man does not consult God before commiting an act, why should God intervene? He has not been consulted or even considered in this man's decisions so why should God step in and clear up the mess behind him? He shouldn't. God allows abortions, God allows murder, God allows rape and violence, why should He stop all of this when He initially decided that His creation should have free will? It would defeat the point if He stepped in and wiped up our messes when we do not even ask Him for help.
"When a Christian is killed, by any means they rationalize it by stating that it was the persons time to go (God's plan), if a Christian avoids death then they rationalize it by saying that it was not yet their time"
Where do you get this? Don't make things up, if you have evidence, include it. When a Christian is killed, they are dead so they cannot rationalize anything because they are no longer alive. As for a Christian avoiding death, do you mean he/she looks twice before crossing the road and drives at 10mph? Explain yourself, this makes no sense.
"only God knows the time of your demise, if this is true then God wishes abortions to happen as to not would deviate from the plan of an omnipotent omniscient creator, this is impossible."
Again, your theory is absolute baulderdash. True, God does know the time of our deaths and where it will happen etc, but this does not mean that God wishes abortion? God does not want sin, God does not want hate, God does not want murder, God does not want abortion, but that does not mean that He stops it? If He stopped it, that would eliminate free will. There will be a time when He judges those who rejected Him and carried through with these acts, but until then, men will continue to destroy this world.
"This is true, in the sense that their church teaches blind faith and adherence, a blind faith that requires the suspension of logic, for if you follow the teachings to any form of logical conclusion then you would see that if God possesses the powers attributed to him via the ancient texts then the texts themselves are wrong as they teach of free will, and if the texts are wrong then why follow it, as to so or not is both in violation of Gods will if you wish to remain faithful."
Again, your conclusions are absolute tripe. All churches teach blind faith? What kind of nonsense is this?! Provide evidence for such an accusation. My faith is not blind, and it is my faith you are saying false things about, so it is my job to tell you to read the bible before saying such things about something you clearly know very little about.
"you would see that if God possesses the powers attributed to him via the ancient texts then the texts themselves are wrong as they teach of free will"
The bible speaks of God giving us free will, so why does that make it wrong? The bible is the word of God, we learn about God in those ancient texts, God gives us free will, if he didn't, how would you be sitting there typing out all your false theories?
First, back up everything you said providing statistics and evidence that are both factual and proven, then explain how the bible is a violation of God's will as you state in your last paragraph.
Wrong, so wrong. You jump to false conclusions, slow down. Just because women get abortions, how does that make God non-powerful?
Firstly I did not state that God would be non-powerful, I stated that he would not be all-powerful. Secondly I did not jump to a false conclusion, the conclusion is based on deductive logic
Ever heard of cause and effect?
Have you? Do you know what it means?. When debating with Christians on evolution God is touted as the first cause of everything, this would include evil, if not then God did not create all, if so, then God wishes abortion to happen as if he didn't he would not be all-powerful and all-knowing. If God is the originator of all and is all-knowing, he is the originator of evil.
When man does not consult God before commiting an act, why should God intervene? He has not been consulted or even considered in this man's decisions so why should God step in and clear up the mess behind him? He shouldn't
Why would a man need to consult God on that which God already knows and planned for. If God is to intervene then it is already predetermined by God that he would do so, as God would have to have known the actions that this man would take.
God allows abortions, God allows murder, God allows rape and violence, why should He stop all of this when He initially decided that His creation should have free will? It would defeat the point if He stepped in and wiped up our messes when we do not even ask Him for help.
Seems a bit senseless, doesn't it. Omniscience precludes free will. A mans supposed free will is benign when the creator created him to carry out the actions that he "decides" to carry out.
Where do you get this? Don't make things up, if you have evidence, include it. When a Christian is killed, they are dead so they cannot rationalize anything because they are no longer alive. As for a Christian avoiding death, do you mean he/she looks twice before crossing the road and drives at 10mph? Explain yourself, this makes no sense.
I didn't make anything up, are you telling me that Christians do not state that when a loved one dies that it was their time as part of the path that God set out for them? As far as your second point here goes, you know exactly what I mean, of course a dead Christian can't rationalize anything, it is the ones that are still alive that do. As for the last point (as you obviously need clarity on a simple point) I'm talking about people that narrowly avoid certain death, a surviver of a serious gun shot wound or people that survive cancer, etc.
Again, your theory is absolute baulderdash. True, God does know the time of our deaths and where it will happen etc, but this does not mean that God wishes abortion?
You keep stating that my ideas here are garbage, but have yet to answer any of the illogical contradictions posited. Have a little think about this obviously impassioned statement if God knows and the time of your death and the place and has planned it, then it was abortion that the child was destined for, if not then God is not omniscient.
Again, your conclusions are absolute tripe. All churches teach blind faith? What kind of nonsense is this?! Provide evidence for such an accusation. My faith is not blind, and it is my faith you are saying false things about, so it is my job to tell you to read the bible before saying such things about something you clearly know very little about.
It is a central point to Christian dogma that one should worship their God without question, this is blind faith and yes your faith is blind, as you can not even entertain the notion that the teachings of the church are contradictory when faced with pure deductive reasoning. I have read the Bible, and I do know quite a lot about Christianity, it is from this that I can form my deductions as to do so with out any knowledge would be ignorance.
The bible speaks of God giving us free will, so why does that make it wrong? The bible is the word of God, we learn about God in those ancient texts, God gives us free will, if he didn't, how would you be sitting there typing out all your false theories?
It is wrong as the Bible teaches of God's omniscience and also of his granting of free will, and omniscience precludes free will, so if the Bible teaches that both exist then one or both must be wrong. As for me, as I don't believe in God I truly know I have free will and can sit here typing things that get Christians all worked up as they can't explain it.
Ok, I understand better now that you have explained your post.
"I did not state that God would be non-powerful, I stated that he would not be all-powerful. Secondly I did not jump to a false conclusion, the conclusion is based on deductive logic"
I misread this, for that I apologize. As for the conclusion, I still believe it to be false. I think the main argument here is the relation between God's omniscience and free will, which you believe to clash resulting in omniscience precluding free will. I will answer on this below.
"God is touted as the first cause of everything, this would include evil, if not then God did not create all, if so, then God wishes abortion to happen as if he didn't he would not be all-powerful and all-knowing. If God is the originator of all and is all-knowing, he is the originator of evil"
Chiristians believe that God created all things, yes. So, your first point of "this would include evil"; God created man, and God's desire was that man would love Him and what He gave to man. But, love is not real unless we have the ability to not love. God could have created man and left out evil and free will, giving man no choice but to love Him. That isn't what He wanted though; He wanted man to love Him out of choice, He wanted man to love Him amidst all the evil. God created choice for man, and whilst He knew what choices man would make, He wanted man to have that choice to make.
"Why would a man need to consult God on that which God already knows and planned for. If God is to intervene then it is already predetermined by God that he would do so, as God would have to have known the actions that this man would take"
God does not plan out our lives, He gave man a brain so that he could make his own decisions, but God knows our futures and what will happen etc. God would have known "the actions that this man would take" but what I am saying is why would God intervene when the man had not consulted Him before deciding to kill a child and its future.
"Seems a bit senseless, doesn't it. Omniscience precludes free will. A mans supposed free will is benign when the creator created him to carry out the actions that he "decides" to carry out"
No, it doesn't seem senseless at all. Omniscience in no way precludes free will. God didn't "create him to carry out the actions", God created man and gave him choices and decisions, and wanted to be a part of the man's life. God COULD take complete control over our lives and control us like we were His puppets, but as a benevolent God, He wants us to make our own decisions and choices. God knows everything that we do, every choice that we make, every thought that we think, but that does not mean that we have no free will, for He allows us to make our OWN decisions, whether they please Him or not. Wars in history are evidence of that; the Vietnam War, WW1, WW2, the Holocaust etc; He knows they will happen, He allows them to happen. Thus, omniscience does not preclude free will, His knowing our futures does not mean He plans them, He doesn't, He simply knows what will happen and still allows us to make our decisions and mistakes - that is what free will is about.
"are you telling me that Christians do not state that when a loved one dies that it was their time as part of the path that God set out for them?"
No, I am not telling you that; Christians don't all rationalize it like that though, you said that all Christians do. You say that God sets out a path for us as though we have no choice or say in the matter - that is false. Free will is for us to CHOOSE our paths, to CHOOSE what we do now, today and tomorrow.
" I'm talking about people that narrowly avoid certain death, a surviver of a serious gun shot wound or people that survive cancer, etc."
Right, contrary to what you believe, I actually had no idea that is what you meant. So, if I was shot and narrowly escaped death, I would not think to myself 'It musn't be my time to go yet'; God doesn't control us like that, it may be that the person firing had sneezed just as he pulled the trigger and the gun slipped therefore the bullet missed my heart and entered my shoulder instead.
"answer any of the illogical contradictions posited"
What illocical contradictions? The one where you say that omniscience precludes free will? I just did, above, and I showed that omniscience does in no way preclude free will.
"Have a little think about this obviously impassioned statement if God knows and the time of your death and the place and has planned it, then it was abortion that the child was destined for, if not then God is not omniscient."
But He DIDN'T plan it, He ALLOWED the death to happen whether it be disease, murder or freak accident, He allowed it to happen. Same with abortion, He most certainly did not plan it, He allowed it to happen.
"It is a central point to Christian dogma that one should worship their God without question, this is blind faith and yes your faith is blind, as you can not even entertain the notion that the teachings of the church are contradictory when faced with pure deductive reasoning. I have read the Bible, and I do know quite a lot about Christianity, it is from this that I can form my deductions as to do so with out any knowledge would be ignorance."
Here's the thing; the teachings of the church that I attended years ago were corrupt. My bible was the teaching that I turned to and learnt from - so telling me to accept that the church is contradictory is just plain stupid because a) I don't attend church and b) "pure deductive reasoning" - bullshit.
"It is wrong as the Bible teaches of God's omniscience and also of his granting of free will, and omniscience precludes free will, so if the Bible teaches that both exist then one or both must be wrong. As for me, as I don't believe in God I truly know I have free will and can sit here typing things that get Christians all worked up as they can't explain it."
Already stated how and why and that omniscience does not preclude free will. The bible teaches us that God knows all and gives choice and knows the choices we make and allows us to make those choices. As for the second part, I am not getting "all worked up" because I can explain it just like any other true Christian can explain it. I am generally the laid back type anyhow so it takes a lot to work me up, and believe me, an athiest sitting typing an argument on a computer/laptop has zero chance of working me up.
Chiristians believe that God created all things, yes. So, your first point of "this would include evil"; God created man, and God's desire was that man would love Him and what He gave to man. But, love is not real unless we have the ability to not love.
Evil is not the opposite to love, the opposite to love is indifference, for man to love God, evil does not need to exist, evil exists because God wished it too, this would therefore make God evil. Why should anyone love that which is evil?
Furthermore, what you are stating is that God the "ever benevolent" created man out of selfishness and wanted to put his creation through grueling tasks to prove their devotion to him. He out of infinite love created evil? Surely this is not logical. As an aside how does this affect those that have not heard of God, or who through their own specific indoctrination love many Gods?
That isn't what He wanted though; He wanted man to love Him out of choice, He wanted man to love Him amidst all the evil. God created choice for man, and whilst He knew what choices man would make, He wanted man to have that choice to make.
So, to summarize this point, God wanted to create a flawed being, he then decided that this flawed being would be put through various tests to prove they love him. He created man so someone would love him.
But he didn't give every man the ability or the chance to love him, he decided that through geographical location one man would be fat and wealthy and bask in his glory while another would be poor uneducated and starving. With no knowledge of God how can he love him?
Omniscience in no way precludes free will.
Of course it does, if God is to know all, before creating, then the consequences of the actions of his creations are his fault, kind of like cause and effect. If I design a robot, and know exactly what it will do, it does something evil, then I'm at fault, I'm the creator and I designed it with this capacity, the difference is that if I didn't know then it would be a mistake, for an omniscient being not knowing doesn't work as a reason. Therefore free will is only an illusion,
God COULD take complete control over our lives and control us like we were His puppets, but as a benevolent God,
Whether you wish to believe it or not, the omnipotent omniscient creator created you, your actions are controlled, they are the playing out of an intricate tapestry of plots and sub plots in the great big movie that is humanity as thought by the Bible
.Wars in history are evidence of that; the Vietnam War, WW1, WW2, the Holocaust etc; He knows they will happen, He allows them to happen. Thus, omniscience does not preclude free will,
Wars in history, really, how many were fought in his name, how many people lost their lives such as innocent children, the elderly, the mentally retarded. Wars are an action of the great flaw in man, a great flaw the designer must have designed in if he is all knowing. Thus omniscience precludes free will, it has to by it's very definition.
What illocical contradictions? The one where you say that omniscience precludes free will? I just did, above, and I showed that omniscience does in no way preclude free will
No, you did not, you simply propagated the contradiction.
But He DIDN'T plan it, He ALLOWED the death to happen whether it be disease, murder or freak accident, He allowed it to happen. Same with abortion, He most certainly did not plan it, He allowed it to happen.
You do not need to keep typing random words in caps, I can read your lowercase letters too. It seems that you believe that God allows everything to happen and does not step in, that is outside of Noah's flood, the ten commandments, etc. It seems that he allows man some evil things, but steps in on others, I'd class that as favoritism. It is not OK for man to abort an undeveloped ball of cells but it is OK for him to flood the entire world and kill every living thing except a chosen few including living children and the unborn.
Here's the thing; the teachings of the church that I attended years ago were corrupt. My bible was the teaching that I turned to and learned from - so telling me to accept that the church is contradictory is just plain stupid because a) I don't attend church and b) "pure deductive reasoning" - bullshit.
So you don't agree with accepted dogma, you've stepped out on your own essentially creating your own personal schism, the Bible is a flawed manual on life written by men that were ahead of their time but way behind ours. Outside of these points, the Bible does teach not to question God, so if you are cherry picking the points that you wish to live by then you are in violation of that book by which you base your faith.
The bible teaches us that God knows all and gives choice and knows the choices we make and allows us to make those choices
This sentence makes no sense.
I am not getting "all worked up" because I can explain it just like any other true Christian can explain it. I am generally the laid back type anyhow so it takes a lot to work me up, and believe me, an athiest sitting typing an argument on a computer/laptop has zero chance of working me up.
That was more of a generalization on Christians I've debated with than a comment about you, but point taken and comment retracted, I've not seen any reason outside of your use of colorful language to assume that you were getting worked up.
I am not debating with you any longer; someone who takes my statements away from valid points that I make clearly has no wish to debate but to bicker. Futhermore, your theories and conclusions are just as ludacris as before, and you cannot even answer the points that I make. Instead, you take a statement, which is only the end of an explanation, and dispute it with a petty statement you have already made and that I have proved wrong. You deliberately misread my points and take them out of context, which is seen as a major flaw in debating. If I continue, we will only be wasting our time. Lastly, I do not appreciate atheists telling me that I do not obey God or that I am living in violation of God's word; its a chidlish attempt at offence and to be honest, I'd rather debate with someone who has a genuine interest in the debate as opposed to insulting and not following the rules of debate.
someone who takes my statements away from valid points that I make clearly has no wish to debate but to bicker.
Sorry mate but there is no valid points, I do wish to debate as I always do.
Futhermore, your theories and conclusions are just as ludacris as before, and you cannot even answer the points that I make.
I've answered all of your points, you've yet to provide me with an explanation of how omniscience does not preclude free will as you have seen, I've made it clear how it does and all you've stated is that free will exists so therefore it is fact that God granted us the power to change an un changeable plan.
Instead, you take a statement, which is only the end of an explanation, and dispute it with a petty statement you have already made and that I have proved wrong.
You my friend have proved nothing except your inability. I only copy over what I believe to be enough of your statement to get my point across as some of these posts get too long. The reason I've repeated myself is because you are, so I've tried to rephrase what you don't seem to get in the vain attempt to get through to you.
If I continue, we will only be wasting our time.
You can turn tail and run, it's fine by me
Lastly, I do not appreciate atheists telling me that I do not obey God or that I am living in violation of God's word;
I don't care what you appreciate, if you can't see the logic in my arguments then that's fine. If you want to take from this that I think these things of you, then that is up to you
.its a chidlish attempt at offence and to be honest, I'd rather debate with someone who has a genuine interest in the debate as opposed to insulting and not following the rules of debate.
If you say so, there is no offense intended, if you've taken some then I'd assume that, that is because you can't explain the contradictions and are getting defensive as most theists do.
I've a very genuine interest in debate, but you my friend are a hypocrite, you've basically told me that I've taken all your arguments out of context, and that your explanations are right and mine are wrong, and you have the audacity to accuse me of not following the "rules" of debate, give me a break, stop being a coward and come out fighting, I respect any theist that does this and I've debated with quite a few on here, ones that'd make your head spin with their level of knowledge.
Oops. It would appear that I read and responded very hastily. My apologies.
I'll be keeping my tag the same though. Hopefully this response will be more relevant to the debate at hand.
Your premise is perfectly logical. Additionally you could use the same reasoning to ask why murder is a sin or should be punishable, which would would cut right to the heart of the debate.
The flaw in your premise is that it doesn't account for free will, which Christians place emphasis on. They pretty much have to put free will in the equation for Christianity to make any sense at all.
Exactly what the relationship between God's plan and free will is varies from sect to sect and among individuals. But I do know of at least one explanation that I can accept:
Sin is not a part of God's plan. It is a result of our free will. What God planned can be made undone when we give in to our wicked sides. That is why sin is such a big deal. Murder is a sin, therefore it changes God's plans. Therefore "good Christians" should stand against it. And they believe that abortion is murder, so they stand against it for the same reason.
So, I guess what I'm saying is, I believe that some Christians would be able to adequately defend against your argument.
Whether or not these are the same Christians that actually are campaigning against abortion, I do not claim to know.
Man, playing Devil's advocate for Christians is exhausting.
Your premise is perfectly logical. Additionally you could use the same reasoning to ask why murder is a sin or should be punishable, which would would cut right to the heart of the debate.
I could have, and have tried in the past, but nothing gets Christian blood flowing better than the topic of abortion. I was getting annoyed at the lack of responses from other debates so I disguised the debate a sort of "contradictions of dogma in abortions clothes" type thing, and it worked, this is the most popular debate that I've set up here, and I've been here a while.
Sin is not a part of God's plan. It is a result of our free will. What God planned can be made undone when we give in to our wicked sides. That is why sin is such a big deal. Murder is a sin, therefore it changes God's plans. Therefore "good Christians" should stand against it. And they believe that abortion is murder, so they stand against it for the same reason.
If God's plan can be undone by the actions of man then the powers attributed to him are false, omniscience precludes free will, and if God is omniscient he knew before he set these actions in motion how they would play out, it is he that supposedly created each individual, and Satan for that matter. If before beginning when there was only God he would have known that one day he would create Satan and he would also create man, he would also know how it would play out, it is in his omnipotence that he created us and in his omniscience that he foresaw it all.
Man, playing Devil's advocate for Christians is exhausting.
Kind of amusing playing "devils" advocate for Christians. It's not something that I'd like to try though.
First of all abortion before a certain time cannot be classed as murder, secondly, you don't seem to be getting the point of this debate. I'm trying to highlight an important contradiction. The only way around here is to court controversy and abortion is a really hot topic especially where Christians are concerned.
Actually it CAN be classed as murder. It's not. But sometime in the future the definition could change.
I understand your point. It's just stupid. There are several standard replies a Christian can give
1. They're doing God's work and undoing the devil's work.
2. Their campaigns are also part of God's plan.
3. Campaigning against abortion (a form of murder) is a test of their faith.
You're not highlighting any contradictions. You're making a weak and pathetic assumption. That's why I didn't give a serious reply, because it was a waste of my time. Fucking cunt.
Fist of all I didn't down vote you, I don't do that, I don't see the point.
Secondly the premise explains everything, it is something that you obviously don't understand, so I'll not labor the point here, read some of my other disputes to people that take the time to type some thought out points instead of vomiting illogical spew all over the place.
You're not highlighting any contradictions. You're making a weak and pathetic assumption. That's why I didn't give a serious reply, because it was a waste of my time. Fucking cunt.
I've made no assumptions, and if you think they are weak and pathetic I'd like to hear your explanations, but I assume that you have none, if you did then you'd post them instead of trying in vain to be insulting over the Internet, which is in itself pathetic, "oh cuntguy called me a fucking cunt, whatever will I do?"
And I did post a reply. I'm not a Christian but I gave you a Christian's response. That's how stupid and pointless this debate is... that I'm actually arguing for a side I don't believe in.
How can anyone who is pro choice want to exclude someone of practicing their own beliefs. Abortion being right or wrong isnt the question, its if christians should stop campaigning against it. No one should stop campaigning against anything they think is unjust reguardless of how I feel about the issue.
OK lets see, I had sex,without a condom.Then I end the life of what i would have reproduced,simply because i was irresponsible.That makes a lot of sense.
Kill a baby because you went sleeping around and didn't want it...HOW EVIL IS THAT?!
That makes no sense whatsoever. According to the typical Christian beliefs, abortion is murder of a child. Would you say that since God has everything planned out, Christians shouldn't try to stop people from abusing their children? That if there's a country where people are being tortured to death by their government, Christians should sit back and be fine with it because obviously it's all in God's plan? According to your logic, that would have to be true, but I'm pretty sure you'd find very few people to agree with you on that one.
I am a Christian and while I have never (and would never) campaign against abortion; I (unlike many, both Christian and atheist alike) try my best not to tell others what they can and can't do.
And yeah... I hope people realize that being a Christian and following the Bible word for word are not the same thing, especially in certain Christian denominations.
Being a Christian as the name implies is about believing in Jesus Christ being the son of God and dying for out sins. Otherwise; there is not CHRIST in Christians. That would pretty much just make them theist of some other sort.
And yeah... I hope people realize that being a Christian and following the Bible word for word are not the same thing, especially in certain Christian denominations.
This is something that perplexes me. Is the bible not the infallible word of God? Can pick'n'mix religion ever have a leg to stand on when it is obvious that they have man made rules?
I am saying that there is a difference between reading the Bible and actually being a Christian:
Christians are SUPPOSED to read the Bible, and keep it: but reading the Bible and keeping it isn't what makes people a Christian.
It's the difference between studying the law and becoming a lawyer, or taking a science class and actually being a scientist.
That is what I'm saying.
But the main example I'm trying to put is how some people call themselves Christians because they read the Bible, but they aren't Christian because they don't believe in Christ.
I am saying that there is a difference between reading the Bible and actually being a Christian:
True I'm not a Christian and I've read it.
Christians are SUPPOSED to read the Bible, and keep it: but reading the Bible and keeping it isn't what makes people a Christian.
I'm aware of this, and it is what I find confusing, I'd say of all the world religions Christianity has the the most schisms, if you discount the old testament you can technically distance yourself from the Jews and Muslims but there are so many more under the Christian banner, it seems that man can not agree on which teachings to base their beliefs in, if they did there would only be Roman Catholicism, and we all know how that went.
It's the difference between studying the law and becoming a lawyer, or taking a science class and actually being a scientist.
I can't really agree here, a lawyer or scientist are practitioners of specifically man made rules, open to fallibility and ridicule in a way that religions are not, those that study a small piece of these things can have a skewed knowledge but there are places to go to get this set right, religious dogma does not work the same.
But the main example I'm trying to put is how some people call themselves Christians because they read the Bible, but they aren't Christian because they don't believe in Christ.
I definitely see your point here, I was not aware of Christians that did not believe in Christ, kind of silly in a way, it's like an Atheist that believes in God.
But I DO agree that pick-and-mix religions are wrong at the foundation...
If you're going to use the title of a religion you need to commit yourself FULLY to it; the good and the bad. Otherwise it shows that the person is two-faced, and weak. <__< I wonder what arguments I shall get for this one
To get a feel for what I'm talking about read my arguments with Billie and Genesis1vs1, it think that maybe you'd be a decent rational debater that I could have a battle with on this subject as both of those descended into name-calling or similar childish defense.
no the christians should not stop compaigning against abortion since it is unmoral in their eyes and since they have the freedom of speach but i do belive christian extremists should stop protesting violantly also as robert casey said in 1990 77 percent of people believed that abortion was murder
So you as a nonChristian knows what Christians should believe and what we are all about? LMAO
You are the secular humanist...you are the moral relativist who does not believe there is right and wrong remember? You reject authority and find nothing wrong with killing if it suits your purpose. Abortion is fine to you throughout the nine months.....wow what a compassionate chap you are Gary.
You don't know squat about abortion. Nadda nothing.
Thank God.........well honey if what we believe is right...you will be doing more than blowing hot air. LOL Pun intended.
And you can think back on this conversation about how you mocked God and those that believed in Him. And when God looks at you Gary and says....Why didn't you stand up for the unborn...what will you say then? I would give anything to be a fly on the wall...but I won't care.
The fact is GAry......let me educate you here.
And gee why do you troll around the Christian threads.....if you can't stand what we are all about. I have noticed that.....but be the love in your secular heart eh?
Anyway....abortion is a tough issue because most people with a brain know what abortion does. If it did not kill a living human being......it would not be an issue and would not divide political parties. But it is killing an innocent livign life. The abortionists goal Gary is to kill during the medical procedure. His job is not done until.......the unborn is dead and all contents are gone and not left in the woman. The goal Gary is death to the unborn. This is contrary to all the scriptures in the bible. It is contrary to all those what really love God and stand on the Word. Those that CLAIM to be Christian and are pro-choice are really pro-abortion and will also have to answer to God.
For a believer in Christ standing up for the life in the womb is not blowing hot air. Only to a moron...who is so self centered that he can't see beyond his own ego would abortion be acceptable.
The question here was poorly written...but then if someone set it up this poorly I highly doubt they know much more about abortion than you do.
"So you as a nonChristian knows what Christians should believe and what we are all about?"
No i think that what you infer from other peoples statements is quite often only what you want to infer from than, and probably not even broadly related to what they actually mean.
"You are the secular humanist...you are the moral relativist who does not believe there is right and wrong remember?"
Not sure if i remember could you please tell me what i am again, im's too's stupid's to make up's my own mind's.
"You reject authority and find nothing wrong with killing if it suits your purpose."
Fucking hell where did you get the idea that i could kill if it suits my purpose, im actually gob smacked.
"Abortion is fine to you throughout the nine months.....wow what a compassionate chap you are Gary"
Oh right that answers it.
Em, abortions are only legally allowed to take place within the ifrst fifteen weeks (not the nine moths, i agree that would be wrong) of pregnancy during which time a fetus has not even developed, what you have is blob of cells with no discernible nervous system or brain activity, if you want to call that murder then the next time your husband has a hand shandy and flushes his little swimmers doen the toilet he is committing genocide:-O
"You don't know squat about abortion. Nadda nothing. "
Really i didn't know i didn't know a lot about abortion, thanks for helping me realise that.
"Thank God.........well honey if what we believe is right...you will be doing more than blowing hot air."
I don't understand the pun, or the have any grasp of the context it was made in.
"And you can think back on this conversation about how you mocked God and those that believed in Him"
I don't mock those that choose to beleive in God, but i do think its quite irrational to beleive in magic.
"Why didn't you stand up for the unborn...what will you say then?"
They same reason i don't shed a tear for the unborn chicken i fry and scramble for my breakfast.
"I would give anything to be a fly on the wall...but I won't care. "
Don't worry you will be a fly on the wall.
"The fact is GAry......let me educate you here."
Is that not what you've been trying to do up to now?
".....if you can't stand what we are all about. I have noticed that.....but be the love in your secular heart "
Christian threads, if you referring to the debates on the existence of God i find them stumulating, i didn't relaise only thiests were allowed to contribute to those.
"If it did not kill a living human being......it would not be an issue and would not divide political parties."
It all depends on your qualification of "living" really.
"But it is killing an innocent livign life"
I do not beleive it is.
"The goal Gary is death to the unborn."
Ok, fair enough, i will admit that is the goal, i do however think that "death to the unborn" is an unfair dramatisation of the process.
"This is contrary to all the scriptures in the bible."
Well if the bible was where i sourced my moral code i suppose id be upset as well.
"It is contrary to all those what really love God and stand on the Word."
So what, you have to be a Chrisitian or a Jew to really love God?
"Those that CLAIM to be Christian and are pro-choice are really pro-abortion and will also have to answer to God."
Yes for he is vengeful and insecure, and he will smite them for their past transgressions,misdemeanours, and misplaced heretical beliefs :-[]
"Only to a moron...who is so self centered that he can't see beyond his own ego would abortion be acceptable."
Why do you care so much about the unbron , there is whole world of sufering out there, why not try to acknowledge and alleviate some of that?
"The question here was poorly written...but then if someone set it up this poorly I highly doubt they know much more about abortion than you do"
Hmph. Unless you are saying them should stop campaigning ONLY because of their beliefs I would agree with you. But why should Christians be the only one to shut up? Not every christian is against abortion, and not every anti-abortionist/pro-lifer has their opinions on it based on their religion either.
I know I don't.
People have every right to form their opinions on something, just like others have the right to support something.
This debate wasn't really about abortion directly, I was trying to debate some Christians about free will, but this was fruitless. So I set it up as a logical trap as abortion is a hot topic that get's people worked up.
I have no problem with peoples' right to protest and would never wish to deny such.
In this fine country (GO USA!), people are allowed to voice their opinions regardless of what anyone thinks of them. Whether you like it or not, they have the right to speak out against it just like proponents of abortion have the right to speak for it.
This is a copypasta from another dispute I've had on this topic so I'll just let you know the same as it is only fair.
"This debate wasn't really about abortion directly, I was trying to debate some Christians about free will, but this was fruitless. So I set it up as a logical trap as abortion is a hot topic that get's people worked up.
I have no problem with peoples' right to protest and would never wish to deny such."
They definitely have every right; if a non-Christian is allowed to campaign for abortion / against abortion then a Christian should be allowed to do the same they shouldn't be discriminated for because of their religion.
This is a copypasta from another dispute I've had on this topic so I'll just let you know the same as it is only fair.
"This debate wasn't really about abortion directly, I was trying to debate some Christians about free will, but this was fruitless. So I set it up as a logical trap as abortion is a hot topic that get's people worked up.
I have no problem with peoples' right to protest and would never wish to deny such."
