T1B

Tom - the definitions you provide would make all believers agnostic, since they cannot know of the existence of a god, but only believe in it. I was going to say that it makes everyone agnostic since no one can know with certainty that god doesn't exist. But a rationalist ('sup, mvscal) could claim that a lack of proof, and the utter impossibility of there ever being proof, of god's existence is sufficient to make the claim of knowledge that there is no god. Kinda turns the conventional thinking about agnosticism on its ear when all believers are now agnostic, but some atheists are not.

88, from the way you just described yourself I'd say you and I are identical. You don't sound like an atheist. You sound like an agnostic. To put a finer point on it, I'd say you even sound like me in this regard: I'm agnostic, but if someone put a gun to my head and said, "I know you say you don't know, so you have no faith in either direction, but I'm forcing you to pick a side. Based on what you know, which way way would lean? Theist or atheist?"

In such a circumstance, yeah, I'd have to say that I lean more towards atheism. I'm simply more comfortable with the notion that I know much of the Bible is the stuff of fairy tales, and all of it was written by men with agendas; it is not the Word of some infallible God using man's hand as His pen. I also know that priests and other religious leaders have no spiritual authority whatsoever. They're just odd men who aspired to and were ultimately given an even odder job.

I'm aware of what I don't know, yet there are things I do know; I'm more comfortable in leaning towards those things, all of which point to God being a man-made invention.

But I'm still agnostic.

Thanks 88, point of note.

88 wrote: You're off the rails again, Tom. What makes it the Truth? Because you believe it to be so? Does it trouble you at all to know that a majority of the human beings on this planet disagree with your version of the Truth and have their own version of it?

I didn't say THE Truth, as much as I said "is Truth", there's a difference. The phenomena to which I was referring does in fact come in ways that are personal to the individual. By "is Truth", I was meaning you'll know it is REAL - when it happens to you.

Van, Smackie

a = WITHOUT

a + theist = WITHOUT GOD
a + gnostic = WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE

So you would be correct in concluding that those that believe but are WITHOUT knowledge could be called Theistic Agnostics Theists.

With God, Without Knowledge

This is the merry go 'round Van and I have been on and we could get dizzy discussing. Van calls the article "pablum", that was just one source. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this point of semantics :D

I didn't say THE Truth, as much as I said "is Truth"

Shit, now you've done it...

Tom, it's a ride we seem to enjoy, too, and I don't see us climbing off any time soon, do you?

BSmack wrote:
Nobody ever said that was the exact actual certificate filed in 1961. If you go to get a passport today and you need to get a certified copy of your birth certificate, that document above is the kind of document that your county registrar's office will provide to you. They won't be giving you an exact replica of your original. They never have and they never will.

bull.

fukking.

shit.

i have gotten copies of my birth certificate and guess what? it was a FUKKING COPY!!!! yup, that's why they call them copies. it is not a modern 'puter generated thingy like you have shown because, anybody could generate something like that very easily.

Van wrote:all of it was written by men with agendas; it is not the Word of some infallible God using man's hand as His pen.

Just for what it's worth to you, the "agnostic," Van, everything ever written was written by someone who had some kind of agenda.

Make money.
For self-fulfillment.
For fame.
Push an idea.
Tell what he knows to be the truth.
Etc.

The Bible is no different.

The writers (40 of them) all had an agenda, no doubt about it.

What IS different about the Bible is that it is a SPECTACULARLY REMARKABLE book on MANY different levels.

There is no other book that remotely compares to it.

Forty authors, written over many hundreds of years -- the interconnection between books, and the message of the books, related incidents, etc., is again, just REMARKABLE.


Seriously, you don't need to take my word for it, and you may even be waving it off as you read this.

But if you are ... open minded ... then dedicate a period of time, for yourself, to STUDY the Bible.

Learn about it.


FANTASTIC.

Indeed Van, it's a fun ride.

Here's some great stuff I've read. Hard to argue with it, in my opinion.

It involves human instinct. Instincts have evolved for a purpose ....

Without them we wouldn't be complete human beings. If men and women didn't exert themselves to be secure in their persons, made no effort to harvest food or construct shelter there would be no survival. If they didn't reproduce, the earth wouldn't be populated. If there were no social instinct, if men cared nothing for the society of one another, there would be no society. So these desires - for the sex relation, for material and emotional security and for companionship - are perfectly necessary and right .....

They purportedly EVOLVED to sustain the species as most evolution does. It goes on ...

Yet these instincts, so necessary for our existence, often exceed their proper functions. Powerfully, blindly, many times subtly, they drive us, dominate us, and insist upon ruling our lives. Our desires for sex, for material and emotional security, and for an important place in society often tyrannize us. When thus out of joint, man's natural desires cause him great trouble, practically all the trouble there is. No human being, however good, is exempt from these troubles. Nearly every serious emotional problem can be seen as a case of misdirected instinct. When that happens, our great natural assets, the instincts, have turned into physical and mental liabilities.

And other great line along these lines ...

Driven by a hundred forms of fear,
self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the
toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they
hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably
find that at some time in the past we have made decisions
based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt.

It'd be interesting to hear a contrarian point of view on those pieces of text. I'd especially like to hear poptarts opinion as I believe that breaks down what we lump into "original sin" and it explains just how broken a species we are - when compared to the other animals of the Kingdom.

smackaholic wrote:i have gotten copies of my birth certificate and guess what? it was a FUKKING COPY!!!! yup, that's why they call them copies. it is not a modern 'puter generated thingy like you have shown because, anybody could generate something like that very easily.

I've seen how town and city recorders in Connecticut do business. I guess I can't say I'm surprised that they haven't scanned their birth records yet.

poptart wrote:

Van wrote:all of it was written by men with agendas; it is not the Word of some infallible God using man's hand as His pen.

Just for what it's worth to you, the "agnostic," Van, everything ever written was written by someone who had some kind of agenda.

Make money.
For self-fulfillment.
For fame.
Push an idea.
Tell what he knows to be the truth.
Etc.

The Bible is no different.

Except that the Bible was written for all those same reasons, even as its supporters claim it to be the Word of God.

That makes it a little different, supposedly...yet it isn't, in fact.

The writers (40 of them) all had an agenda, no doubt about it.

Yes, they did. That's just it: THEY did...not God.

What IS different about the Bible is that it is a SPECTACULARLY REMARKABLE book on MANY different levels.

So is The Silmarillion, which is equally believable while being a whole lot better read.

There is no other book that remotely compares to it.

I'm sure that fans of the Koran and similar religious tomes would disagree.

Forty authors, written over many hundreds of years -- the interconnection between books, and the message of the books, related incidents, etc., is again, just REMARKABLE.

Why? What's so remarkable about it?

Seriously, you don't need to take my word for it, and you may even be waving it off as you read this.

Considering I've read it myself, well, yes.

But if you are ... open minded ... then dedicate a period of time, for yourself, to STUDY the Bible.

Learn about it.

It never fails to bore me to tears.

Also, how "open minded" have you been about devoting equal study to other religions and their bibles?

FANTASTIC. FANTASTICAL.

poptart wrote: What IS different about the Bible is that it is a SPECTACULARLY REMARKABLE book on MANY different levels.

There is no other book that remotely compares to it.

Forty authors, written over many hundreds of years -- the interconnection between books, and the message of the books, related incidents, etc., is again, just REMARKABLE.

i was on the review committee for an organization that gave out bursaries to namibian high school students. the application required written response to two prompts. it's rather tedious to read through 300+ essays when 280 of them are nearly identical. imagine, students with similar cultural parameters responding similarly to the same questions.

you are easily impressed.

also, how come you never brag about all the genocide god demanded of his people?

Van wrote:the Bible was written for all those same reasons (money, fame, fulfillment, push an idea, agenda, etc.)

I don't agree, and that assertion is purely speculation on your part.
Most of the writers TOLD us what their motivation was.
But you're free to your opinion.

Van wrote:Yes, they did. That's just it: THEY did (write the Bible) ...not God.

I thought you said you are an agnostic?

If so, why would you make that kind of dismissal, if'n you're open to the possibility that the God of the Bible is real?

Van wrote:What's so remarkable about it (the Bible)?

Read it and give it some serious STUDY.

Just for ONE thing, the fulfillment of prophecy by Jesus Christ is amazing.

The continuity of the books, in subtle but IMPORTANT ways, is remarkable.

It's remarkable in SO many ways.

Again, if you've read it, fine.
Do more looking into it.
Do some looking into it from the perspective of a resource who is FRIENDLY toward it ... if you're open.

Van wrote:Also, how "open minded" have you been about devoting equal study to other religions and their bibles?

I'm not an agnostic, Van.

I spent my time in search of the truth and I am very comfortable that Christ is it.

M Club wrote:how come you never brag about all the genocide god demanded of his people?

Come down to the Theology Forum and I'll be glad to answer.

Van wrote:Yes, they did. That's just it: THEY did (write the Bible) ...not God.

I thought you said you are an agnostic?

If so, why would you make that kind of dismissal, if'n you're open to the possibility that the God of the Bible is real?

I'm dismissive of the Bible, not of the possible existence of God. The Bible is a man-made artifact, same as every other religion's brochure.

If there is a God, I'm pretty certain that he's everyone's God, not just believers of this book or that book. I'm agnostic about God, period, not the Bible's ridiculous creation of him.

Van wrote:What's so remarkable about it (the Bible)?

Read it and give it some serious STUDY.

Just for ONE thing, the fulfillment of prophecy by Jesus Christ is amazing.

No, it isn't. It's a book, written with a specific purpose in mind. The hero lives up to what was foretold in the beginning of the book. Imagine that.

pop, you need to stop using prophecy as an argument for anything. It makes you look like a nutjob zealot. Keep your amazement over prophecies to yourself, or at least save it for when you can trot it out to a palm reader.

The continuity of the books, in subtle but IMPORTANT ways, is remarkable.

You think it would've been included in the book if it didn't fit the plot? Think about all the things that didn't make the final edit; imagine all those chapters left on the cutting room floor.

It's remarkable in SO many ways.

I'm still waiting for even one.

Again, if you've read it, fine.
Do more looking into it.
Do some looking into it from the perspective of a resource who is FRIENDLY toward it ... if you're open.

That would apply to the Koran or any other epic...wouldn't it?

Van wrote:Also, how "open minded" have you been about devoting equal study to other religions and their bibles?

I'm not an agnostic, Van.

I spent my time in search of the truth and I am very comfortable that Christ is it.

Yes, and had you gone searching for the truth in Buddhism or Islam with that same pre-determined mindset, you would've very likely found just as much truth there.

Someone's wrong here, pop. 1.8 million Christians are wrong, or 1.5 billion Muslims or wrong, or all those Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs or wrong. Everyone's equally convinced that they've found the truth, and that everybody else is mistaken. Some of you even believe that those others will burn in hell for being mistaken.

Pretty damn closed-minded thinking there, pop.

I can not possibly answer every cut and paste responses, or all of the responses at all. I can only say this.:

I do not fear of what I may have said in here, this forum, but at what I have NOT said in my life to others.....in here or otherwise.

I do not think that my typed words, or spoken, would do justice to what I don't only believe in, but know. Knowledge.

I know that my Redeemer lives, and on the last day I will see Him, in my own flesh, stand upon the Earth.

It is impossible to impart knowledge to those who do not want it. I get it. No matter how strenuous or logical the arguments of me or others in here that not only have faith, but knowledge, it won't get through. But it is upon us to still try.

I am just a dirty rotten sinner, unworthy of all the grace that is given not just to me, but to us all. My words, typed or otherwise, are harsh and common and well, not what is needed to be listened to. I succeed very rarely, as did He whose message I very BADLY, though sincerely, try to convey.

The concepts needed for understanding are beyond me, for the most part, to explain. So that is why some of us just ask the listeners to read at least the 'Red Letters', that is, the words in The Bible that Jesus spoke. I can not, nor can anyone, legitamize the entire Judeo-Christian histories, but I think that if one actually tries, ...reading the "red letters" will open up the truth that is Jesus Christ and his message to the whole world. All you have to to do is ask.

I apologize for any harshness and condescention I showed during this discussion. I am only human, and am given to all it's failings.

He is the light of the world. I only try to bring some of his brightness into a quickly darkening place.

Thanks,

Scott

Rog, you merely have belief, not knowledge. Get over yourself.

Van wrote:No, it isn't. It's a book, written with a specific purpose in mind. The hero lives up to what was foretold in the beginning of the book. Imagine that.

pop, you need to stop using prophecy as an argument for anything. It makes you look like a nutjob zealot. Keep your amazement over prophecies to yourself, or at least save it for when you can trot it out to a palm reader.

As always, you're free to your opinion.

Much of the fulfillment of prophecy on the part of Jesus was entirely beyond His control.
The prophecies were written by different writers in different times and it meshed together in fulfillment by Christ in ways that are TRULY remarkable.

In fact, the way the Bible pieces togther from Genesis to Revelation (through 40 different writers in different times - on common themes) is AMAZING, also.

The more I read it the more amazing it gets.

Oh well.

Van wrote:Someone's wrong here, pop. 1.8 million Christians are wrong, or 1.5 billion Muslims or wrong, or all those Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs or wrong.

You're absolutely right.

Someone is wrong and someone is right.

That should've been 1.8 billion Christians, not million.

pop, when the hero fulfills prophecy, it's not TRULY remarkable, it's TRULY fiction. Of course he fulfilled the prophecies. The fairy tale doesn't work for shit if he doesn't.



"Don't you love it when a plan comes together?"

Van,

Why are you so adamant over not only NOT believing in something, but also have a passion to make sure no one believes?

Why the vitriol?

poptart wrote:

M Club wrote:how come you never brag about all the genocide god demanded of his people?

Come down to the Theology Forum and I'll be glad to answer.

ja, because it's so hard to answer a question in one virtual space rather than the other no one frequents. the question was posed here in response to an assertion you made here.

Roger_the_Shrubber wrote:Van,

Why are you so adamant over not only NOT believing in something, but also have a passion to make sure no one believes?

Why the vitriol?

i don't think he told you not to believe. he said believing doesn't equate to knowing. you've continuously demonstrated you don't know, just that you hope you're right. great, i hope your faith pans out and you meet your maker. sooner rather than later, insha'allah.

M Club wrote:

poptart wrote:

M Club wrote:how come you never brag about all the genocide god demanded of his people?

Come down to the Theology Forum and I'll be glad to answer.

ja, because it's so hard to answer a question in one virtual space rather than the other no one frequents. the question was posed here in response to an assertion you made here.

Ok, I don't brag about that because it's not my calling.


Matthew 28:18-20
18 All power is given unto me (Christ) in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.


There is no reason for me to talk about what you asked.

If someone genuinely wants to ask a theological question, the theology forum is the best place for it.

I don't sense you're really interested - other than to mock - and that's just fine here.

poptart wrote:

M Club wrote: Ok, I don't brag about that because it's not my calling.


Matthew 28:18-20
18 All power is given unto me (Christ) in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.


There is no reason for me to talk about what you asked.

If someone genuinely wants to ask a theological question, the theology forum is the best place for it.

I don't sense you're really interested - other than to mock - and that's just fine here.

huh, not your calling to answer a simple question? you're going on and on about how fascinating it is that the bible fits so perfectly together because jesus 'miraculously' fits the description of old testament prophesy that i genuinely wonder where god's old testament exhortation of genocide fits in here. the only think i mock is your serial rationalization.

Now you've changed your question.

You asked, "how come you never brag about all the genocide god demanded of his people?"

I gave you my answer.

It's not my calling to brag about that.


If you really want to know about Old Testament events, take it to the Theology Forum, because a discussion like that takes some back and forth and probably calls for some follow-up dialogue.

But it's not your desire to have that kind of talk.

You want to mock and that's fine, too.

poptart wrote:Now you've changed your question.

You asked, "how come you never brag about all the genocide god demanded of his people?"

I gave you my answer.

It's not my calling to brag about that.

i apologize, i didn't realize we were splitting hairs to the point the gist didn't hold. let me rephrase: you're so enraptured by how seamless the bible appears to run. obviously the old testament carries as much weight for you as the new since its prophesies are what validate christ's mission. so that means you worship a god that advocates genocide. and not only that call for genocide, he metes out punishment for leaving even a single woman or child alive rather than exterminating an entire group of people. rather vengeful for a god who later exhorted his people to turn the other people. i mean, consistency, right?

pop wrote:If you really want to know about Old Testament events, take it to the Theology Forum, because a discussion like that takes some back and forth and probably calls for some follow-up dialogue.

This place is every bit as capable of handling back-and-forth discussion and follow-up dialogue as the Theology forum. No reason to move the discussion to a closet when it originated here.

pop, nobody reads the Theology forum. Be glad someone is giving you the chance to make your case(s) here, out in the open, where everyone will see it.

Rog, my vitriol is specifically directed at you and others of your ilk, because of your laughable arrogance. You always want to get all high and mighty, telling us what you know, when you cannot possibly know. You always seek to put yourself above others because of what you believe, and it's quite galling, especially coming from you.

You completely lack the humility others always speak of here as some sort of prerequisite for earning God's favor. If anything, I'm beginning to think God may have paid you a visit alright, and it was along the lines of a pity fuck.

Same as I said before, you really need to STFU and let pop handle your team's argument. He's far better equipped to do so, and he's far less maddening. All you do is spout self-serving, sanctimonious garbage. You're like the Terrell Owens of Born Agains.

You're like the Terrell Owens of Born Agains.

If you want to have this discussion, take it to the NFL player analogy forum.

op, nobody reads the Theology forum.

You should check it out. Every third Thursday is Apostasy Day. Poptart posts hottie threads, SCS dons a hairshirt, and Dins just lurks gripping his rosary.

Van wrote: You completely lack the humility others always speak of here as some sort of prerequisite for earning God's favor.

Nobody spoke about "earning God's favor".

Tom, earning a visit from Him is tantamount to earning His favor, and supposedly a humble beseeching is required to receive the gift of faith from Him. That's what you, pop, Wags and Rog have all claimed at various points, that the search must be conducted with humility (among other things) before God will favor a person with the gift of faith.

Of course that's almost certainly nonsense, but that is what you and others have said.

The word I primarily used was "seek". Humility is a gift as well. But go ahead and quote me in this thread where I did what you're asserting I did.

Tom wrote:If you truly seek and desire to come to know Him, and humbly ask Him to reveal Himself to you - He will.

You were saying, Tom?

Van wrote:

Tom wrote:If you truly seek and desire to come to know Him, and humbly ask Him to reveal Himself to you - He will.

You were saying, Tom?

Just seeing if you were paying attention.

88 wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:The word I primarily used was "Sleestak".

FTFY



I confess. This post doesn't make any fucking sense whatsoever. But it was the first thing that came to mind. An act of God, perhaps.

All Sleestak references get automatically RACKED though.


RACK

humbly ask Him to reveal Himself to you - He will.

Oh, delicious. I'll do the same, little boy.

Sin,

Sick. And not your post either, that was funny. What's sick is that it is so close to true apparently.

rts wrote:I can not possibly answer every cut and paste responses

Well, I guess there is a God.