1+1+1 = 1 ?
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
You are another hypocrite!
You point fingers at christians saying they don't respect others, you are just the same, hypocrite, hypocritical Rooney_07.You sound like a troublemaker! Stay out of my religious freedom to believe in whatever I want or don't want, hypocrite and spoilt brat!
I don't have the obligation to believe as what you wish so stay out of it, don't mess with me! 
i think u pretty much summarised the nature of the xtians who try to debate (i would think its troll rather)it always "i say so", "i want so" and "i think so means must be so" behaviour
disgusting
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Demon Bane,
At the very least you can see the effects of those beliefs. If those beliefs require you to harm yourself or commit mass suicide, I am sure you can be a good samaritan and point them out. Other beliefs may not have such drastic consequences but you can also help to point out flaws in them.
You are talking about extreme cases....of cos its good to help those who are clearly in the wrong direction....but we must do it carefully....and tactfully.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
1. You tried to produce a proof-text and I rebutted you on that. But you have not rebutted my John 10:33. I am hardly being defensive here. I don't think your offense was even strong to begin with! BTW, I am only saying what the Bible says, that those who deny Christ as God are not true believers.
2. Indeed I cannot reproduce the miracles to you, but I don't see how that would mean these things did not happen. Unless you hold to a naturalistic view of the world you have no basis to deny that miracles can happen.
3. You failed to understand as usual. Why would it be false witness to write the answers as the examination require? Are exams the test of one's beliefs? Do exams require you to swear on the truth of what you wrote? The answer is NO. It is the test of one's knowledge of the subject matter. Get this clear please.
4. As far as the Bible is concern, where it speaks clearly we should also speak clearly. Where it does not speak clearly Christian liberty and charity should be the guide, so long as it does not violate other parts of Scripture.
BIC
1. I accept that you have quoted somewhat unclear verses that justify your trinity beliefs. I accept that. But you wouldnt accept that there are other christians who quote other verses to justify non-trinity beliefs. Why so defensive? Cant you be a bit fairer and more objective here? Why must you always get your way like a little child?
2. Sorry end of discussion. i take your "miracles" as a claim without proof. You cant reproduce them. You should probably jump into a lions den and pray to your god, like what daniel did. Its not testing god. Its showing faith to others. But I think you dont trust god that much to jump into a lions den anyway. So you cant reproduce miralces. End of discussion for this point!
3. So you would lie to write 4.5 billion years in exams? Tsk Tsk. I cant believe it. Why dont you stand for what you believe, even in exams? Since you are fully convinced that it is a FACT that the earth is 6000 years old, write it in the exam and stand for what you believe! Thats what the bible says!
4. So you do agree that there are grey areas in the bible? Do you also agree that these grey areas might result in different interpretation of scripture because its unclear?
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
I believe He exists. He exists! But does not mean I will want to accept him.
I am not interested in supernatural beings with no credibility.
winsomeea
Why is the god you believe in a He?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
Which of my beliefs are extreme? Of course that would first means you need to define what is "extreme". Next, please show how it is detrimental to myself, and detrimental in what sense?
BIC
1. Your belief that the earth is 6000 years despite overwhelming evidence from the scientific community that its not, is extreme. It is detrimental to you because you might go on and teach your kids/students that the earth is 6000 years old, which is falsehood. (Then again, you might write in your own exams that the earth is 4.5 billion yo, which is very odd to me, abit contradicting too)
2. You keep insisting that you have the "right interpretation" of the bible verses concerning trinity and probably many other issues. You shut out all other interpretations from other christians about trinity. You refuse to be objective about it and look at it from a neutral point of view. This is detrimental and shows that you are unwilling to learn. I stand at a neutral point and say "Ok there are 2 kinds of interpretation, lets not say whos right and whos wrong first but lets just acknowledge the 2 POVs"
-
Some people will say a glass is half-full, others will say its half-empty, some will just say there is glass...and some just say water in the glass...
-
Originally posted by laurence82:
i think u pretty much summarised the nature of the xtians who try to debate (i would think its troll rather)it always "i say so", "i want so" and "i think so means must be so" behaviour
disgusting
I notice they are always right in what they say, when others don't agree with them , wow it is like affecting them and they have to do something to stop it. Whether they do the stopping out of personal ego or love of God we can tell.Practice of love of God is very lacking in many christians.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC
1. I accept that you have quoted somewhat unclear verses that justify your trinity beliefs. I accept that. But you wouldnt accept that there are other christians who quote other verses to justify non-trinity beliefs. Why so defensive? Cant you be a bit fairer and more objective here? Why must you always get your way like a little child?
2. Sorry end of discussion. i take your "miracles" as a claim without proof. You cant reproduce them. You should probably jump into a lions den and pray to your god, like what daniel did. Its not testing god. Its showing faith to others. But I think you dont trust god that much to jump into a lions den anyway. So you cant reproduce miralces. End of discussion for this point!
3. So you would lie to write 4.5 billion years in exams? Tsk Tsk. I cant believe it. Why dont you stand for what you believe, even in exams? Since you are fully convinced that it is a FACT that the earth is 6000 years old, write it in the exam and stand for what you believe! Thats what the bible says!
4. So you do agree that there are grey areas in the bible? Do you also agree that these grey areas might result in different interpretation of scripture because its unclear?
Tcmc,
1. Again, which part of "we are stoning you for claiming to be God" do you not understand? How unclear and vague is that? Again I say, you show me a "clear" verse that denies the deity of Christ and I will show you someone who is unclear about what the doctrine of the incarnation is,
2. If you don't even believe that miracles can happen, there's nothing left to say. And you still haven't provided me with the tools for proving that something happened as it was documented in ancient history, miracle or not. Seems that you have no clue as to what constitutes the legal-historical method of evidence.
3. You must be one of those rare individuals who think that taking exams is a test of one's beliefs! Show me an exam paper where the instructions require that every answer written must also reflect your personal beliefs. If I test you on your knowledge of the Bible, does it mean any of your answers given is a true reflection of your beliefs? Use your brain!
4. I agree that there are areas where the Bible is silent. And where it is, Christian liberty is allowed. But not all things permissible are beneficial. Christians should be led by the Spirit at all times.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC
1. Your belief that the earth is 6000 years despite overwhelming evidence from the scientific community that its not, is extreme. It is detrimental to you because you might go on and teach your kids/students that the earth is 6000 years old, which is falsehood. (Then again, you might write in your own exams that the earth is 4.5 billion yo, which is very odd to me, abit contradicting too)
2. You keep insisting that you have the "right interpretation" of the bible verses concerning trinity and probably many other issues. You shut out all other interpretations from other christians about trinity. You refuse to be objective about it and look at it from a neutral point of view. This is detrimental and shows that you are unwilling to learn. I stand at a neutral point and say "Ok there are 2 kinds of interpretation, lets not say whos right and whos wrong first but lets just acknowledge the 2 POVs"
Tcmc,
1. To say that there is overwhelming evidence for an old earth is to beg the question, since I am saying that the evidence is interpreted, not directly given. You pick a fossil and it has no age label on it. You have to do indirect tests to get the age, and such tests are based on ASSUMPTIONS made.
2. Is it true that it is false that the age of the earth is 6000 years old? Sometime ago the age of the earth was only some hundreds of years old, then along the years the age got older...and older...and older. Would you then say you are teaching wrong things along the way? You are ASSUMING that what scientists believe about the age of the earth is the Gospel truth. I have good reasons to disagree. But I suppose you are not interested at all, so I shall not anyhow cast pearls.
3. An interpretation is either right or wrong. I am not shutting out other interpretations. In fact I am more than happy to confront them and show why they are wrong. This is a better approach than merely dismissing claims. And it seems that for you, an objective and neutral POV involves the rejection of Trinity, because you seem so insistent on that. You mean any view that affirms the Trinity is thereby not objective? When will you deem it as objective anyway? When I have rejected the faith? Duh!
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
I notice they are always right in what they say, when others don't agree with them , wow it is like affecting them and they have to do something to stop it. Whether they do the stopping out of personal ego or love of God we can tell.Practice of love of God is very lacking in many christians.
winsomeea,
Do you agree that humility is a virtue? I believe you do. Now, are Christians always right in what they say? I can honestly tell you, NO. In fact I have yet to hear a Christian claiming to be infallible and inerrant. I would be the first to deny being infallible and inerrant. Some think that the Pope is infallible when he speaks ex cathedra though, but I beg to differ and this is a different issue also. Having said that, I also think that if the Christian has the better argument, the non-Christian should be gracious to accept that, rather than to gripe about being egoistic, hypocritical, or some other guilt-trap accusations to try to negate or undermine the better argument.
-
Humility is very much encouraged and it is a virtue.
God/Jesus also speak about arrogance. It is a no no to God.
Essence of Christianity is love. Love the christians and love the non christians. If words from christians' mouths are of love and humility there will be lesser conflict.
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
Humility is very much encouraged and it is a virtue.
God/Jesus also speak about arrogance. It is a no no to God.
Essence of Christianity is love. Love the christians and love the non christians. If words from christians' mouths are of love and humility there will be lesser conflict.
winsomeea,
Question for you: Pardon me if I misunderstood you, but why do you blame the conflicts solely on the Christians' supposed lack of love and humility?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
winsomeea,
Question for you: Pardon me if I misunderstood you, but why do you blame the conflicts solely on the Christians' supposed lack of love and humility?
By this question of yours, think there is no point to talk further.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
1. To say that there is overwhelming evidence for an old earth is to beg the question, since I am saying that the evidence is interpreted, not directly given. You pick a fossil and it has no age label on it. You have to do indirect tests to get the age, and such tests are based on ASSUMPTIONS made.
2. Is it true that it is false that the age of the earth is 6000 years old? Sometime ago the age of the earth was only some hundreds of years old, then along the years the age got older...and older...and older. Would you then say you are teaching wrong things along the way? You are ASSUMING that what scientists believe about the age of the earth is the Gospel truth. I have good reasons to disagree. But I suppose you are not interested at all, so I shall not anyhow cast pearls.
3. An interpretation is either right or wrong. I am not shutting out other interpretations. In fact I am more than happy to confront them and show why they are wrong. This is a better approach than merely dismissing claims. And it seems that for you, an objective and neutral POV involves the rejection of Trinity, because you seem so insistent on that. You mean any view that affirms the Trinity is thereby not objective? When will you deem it as objective anyway? When I have rejected the faith? Duh!
1. This we already have addressed.. Regarding this, you gave VERY contradicting answers. It seems you are not sure about the age of the earth. Initially you said the earth was 6000 years old. And when I ask what you would write in an exam, you said you would write that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. When you give contradicting answers and think it's acceptable, this is the end of our discussion. You are just giving answers as you wish and as you like. You are giving answers that will suit whatever situation you are in.
2. Same for this point.
3. No I never did reject the trinity. For the thousandth time, what I have been trying to tell you is that there are different christians who interpret the bible differently. And you should be objective. Being objective is to say "Yes I accept that there are differing views from mine and that I could possibly be wrong and vice versa". This is being objective.
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
By this question of yours, think there is no point to talk further.
Why? The question wasn't valid?
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
1. This we already have addressed.. Regarding this, you gave VERY contradicting answers. It seems you are not sure about the age of the earth. Initially you said the earth was 6000 years old. And when I ask what you would write in an exam, you said you would write that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. When you give contradicting answers and think it's acceptable, this is the end of our discussion. You are just giving answers as you wish and as you like. You are giving answers that will suit whatever situation you are in.
2. Same for this point.
3. No I never did reject the trinity. For the thousandth time, what I have been trying to tell you is that there are different christians who interpret the bible differently. And you should be objective. Being objective is to say "Yes I accept that there are differing views from mine and that I could possibly be wrong and vice versa". This is being objective.
Tcmc,
1. You are not reading what I wrote at all. Which part of my posts imply that I wasn't sure about the age of the earth? You are confused as usual. I already said that I hold the view of a young earth. And I said that exams were a test of knowledge, not of truth or beliefs. Writing examination answers do not mean one have to stake on the truth of the answers. Please explain what is morally wrong and unChristian about writing the following in an exam paper, "Most scientists believe that the earth is 4.5 billion years old...." You completely ignored this point I made. Why?
2. And for the thousandth time, I know that many Christians interpret the Bible differently and come to different conclusions. But at the same time I am telling you that you can't have all competing interpretations being the right one. Either all are wrong or only one is right. Either the Bible teaches the Trinity or it does not. There is no room for relativity here. You are confused about what being objective is. In any case, I am not infallible and of course I can be wrong. But until you give me good reasons to consider otherwise, what's wrong with me standing my ground that the Bible teaches the Trinity and that this has been defended by the creeds and early church fathers?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
1. You are not reading what I wrote at all. Which part of my posts imply that I wasn't sure about the age of the earth? You are confused as usual. I already said that I hold the view of a young earth. And I said that exams were a test of knowledge, not of truth or beliefs. Writing examination answers do not mean one have to stake on the truth of the answers. Please explain what is morally wrong and unChristian about writing the following in an exam paper, "Most scientists believe that the earth is 4.5 billion years old...." You completely ignored this point I made. Why?
2. And for the thousandth time, I know that many Christians interpret the Bible differently and come to different conclusions. But at the same time I am telling you that you can't have all competing interpretations being the right one. Either all are wrong or only one is right. Either the Bible teaches the Trinity or it does not. There is no room for relativity here. You are confused about what being objective is. In any case, I am not infallible and of course I can be wrong. But until you give me good reasons to consider otherwise, what's wrong with me standing my ground that the Bible teaches the Trinity and that this has been defended by the creeds and early church fathers?
1. It's not unchristian or what. I just find it very contradicting that you would believe with your whole heart about the earth being 6000 years old but not write it in the exams. Like I said, if you think telling me contradicting answers is ok, then thats the end of this point discusiion.
2. "Either all are wrong or only one is right". Again, you go to the polar extremes. Why cant it be all are right, two are wrong or five are right and 3 are wrongs? According to you , there always must be ONE RIGHT, ONE WRONG, ONE BLACK , ONE WHITE. But then i remember you saying that it's ok to lie sometimes. Contradict again. You yourself admit that there are grey areas. And interpretation of the bible HAS MANY grey areas! THere's no need to say which is right or which is wrong!
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
1. It's not unchristian or what. I just find it very contradicting that you would believe with your whole heart about the earth being 6000 years old but not write it in the exams. Like I said, if you think telling me contradicting answers is ok, then thats the end of this point discusiion.
2. "Either all are wrong or only one is right". Again, you go to the polar extremes. Why cant it be all are right, two are wrong or five are right and 3 are wrongs? According to you , there always must be ONE RIGHT, ONE WRONG, ONE BLACK , ONE WHITE. But then i remember you saying that it's ok to lie sometimes. Contradict again. You yourself admit that there are grey areas. And interpretation of the bible HAS MANY grey areas! THere's no need to say which is right or which is wrong!
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
1. It's not unchristian or what. I just find it very contradicting that you would believe with your whole heart about the earth being 6000 years old but not write it in the exams. Like I said, if you think telling me contradicting answers is ok, then thats the end of this point discusiion.
2. "Either all are wrong or only one is right". Again, you go to the polar extremes. Why cant it be all are right, two are wrong or five are right and 3 are wrongs? According to you , there always must be ONE RIGHT, ONE WRONG, ONE BLACK , ONE WHITE. But then i remember you saying that it's ok to lie sometimes. Contradict again. You yourself admit that there are grey areas. And interpretation of the bible HAS MANY grey areas! THere's no need to say which is right or which is wrong!
Tcmc,
1. Seems like you have no idea what examinations are. For the thousandth time, what are examinations testing about? Your knowledge of the subject matter, or your beliefs about what is true? There is nothing contradicting at all. You are simply trying to make an issue out of nothing. You really have nothing to go on, except to make the silly argument that writing down what you have studied about the subject is the same as testifying to the truth of that.
2. You are confused even about what is the nature of truth. Really makes me wonder what kind of education you have been through. You don't believe that truth is exclusive? Then you have deep problems dude. I suppose you have no idea what is the law of non-contradiction also? And the worst thing is that you keep MISREPRESENTING my views, setting up strawmen arguments, and ascribing false positions to me. When are you going to stop doing that just to make yourself look good?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
1. Seems like you have no idea what examinations are. For the thousandth time, what are examinations testing about? Your knowledge of the subject matter, or your beliefs about what is true? There is nothing contradicting at all. You are simply trying to make an issue out of nothing. You really have nothing to go on, except to make the silly argument that writing down what you have studied about the subject is the same as testifying to the truth of that.
2. You are confused even about what is the nature of truth. Really makes me wonder what kind of education you have been through. You don't believe that truth is exclusive? Then you have deep problems dude. I suppose you have no idea what is the law of non-contradiction also? And the worst thing is that you keep MISREPRESENTING my views, setting up strawmen arguments, and ascribing false positions to me. When are you going to stop doing that just to make yourself look good?
BIC
2. Life isnt as simplistic as right or wrong. In school MCQ, yes there is always a right answer. But in life, many things do not have an answer. Many situations lie in the grey area.
instead of demanding or screaming childishly for an answer, we accept the fact that there might be no right or wrong answers in certain life situation, graciously.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC
2. Life isnt as simplistic as right or wrong. In school MCQ, yes there is always a right answer. But in life, many things do not have an answer. Many situations lie in the grey area.
instead of demanding or screaming childishly for an answer, we accept the fact that there might be no right or wrong answers in certain life situation, graciously.
Tcmc,
I never said that all of life is black or white. You are misrepresenting me. You said so yourself that many things do not have an answer. I do not disagree. Having said that, you must also agree that many things have an answer and are not grey at all. Why would seeking for answers be considered childish? If so, then atheists like you must be most childish because you are screaming for answers to all your questions. You can't even accept the answer that God can work in mysterious ways! Duh!
-
No show God's love just argue for the sake of arguing, tsk tsk tsk ! Tcmc, stop discussing with him la.
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
No show God's love just argue for the sake of arguing, tsk tsk tsk ! Tcmc, stop discussing with him la.
It's really interesting how he argues.
He made a claim about miracles so I asked him to prove it.
And in turn, he asked me to GIVE HIM the means to prove his claims.
What kind of argument is that? It is called arguing for the sake of arguing.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
It's really interesting how he argues.
He made a claim about miracles so I asked him to prove it.
And in turn, he asked me to GIVE HIM the means to prove his claims.
What kind of argument is that? It is called arguing for the sake of arguing.
Tcmc, Shall we now conclude that you do not know of any way that miracles csn be empirically proven? No need to talk so much, simple yes or no answet is enough. Ball in your court. -
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc, Shall we now conclude that you do not know of any way that miracles csn be empirically proven? No need to talk so much, simple yes or no answet is enough. Ball in your court.
BIC,
You made the claim, you need to provide the methodology to prove it.
No one is gonna help you on this, sadly.