YAK YAK YAK. THE LONGEST 9:05 MIN. OF MY LIFE. I'M THINKING: I COULD OF HAD A V8. I'M RELATED TO A" KNOWN " HARD CORE ATHEIST IN VA. BUT THE MAN IS INTELLIGENT, HE'S A PSALM 53. This SAME ATHEIST WAS CHASED OUT OF HIS HOME BY DEMONS. INTERESTING, TO YOU, I'M LIKE 'DUDE, YOU GOT TO KNOW THE BIBLE AS WELL AS A THEOLOGIAN BEFORE YOU CAN ATTEMPT TO SLAM IT! YOUR ANSWERS WERE IRRATIONAL & LAUGHABLE. AS 4 ME: DEFEND THE BIBLE? I WOULD AS SOON DEFEND A LION! UNCHAIN IT & IT WILL DEFEND ITSELF!!
question 2 is basically asking "do you think a deductive argument, if sound, can prove the existence of God". That is something I would consider an objectively reasonable standard of evidence.
@Q4, Biblically we are not called to stone people etc. Jesus did not say to do those things. You seem to be referring to ceremonial Jewish law back in a period of theocracy and prior to Jesus in Matthew 5:17 fulfilling Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Interestingly you seem to allude to the problem of hiddnness in your response to #1. That is ironic, because a discussion on the problem of hiddenness I had been having actually inspired the first 3 questions. The last two were more of an afterthought to find out if Christians come off as hypocrites, and if Christian behavior makes people more or less tolerant of Christian ideas and arguments.
You answer to number 1 is very interesting. You do not know what would convince you. Does that mean you cannot phathom a reasonable standard of evidence for God's existence, or does that mean that a reasonable standard of evidence would fail to persuade you?
I am not sure I grant the assumption that God should convince you. Perhaps He is only obligated to provide a reasonable standard of evidence and the rest is up to you.
The reason I do not include the logically contradictory as something an omnipotent being can do, is because logically contradictory things are nonsense. To say that a being should be capable of doing nonsense is a nonsensical requirement, ironically.
I don't think that God "created" the laws of logic. The laws of logic seem to express how reality works, and reality would work in a way consistent with how God's mind naturally works (if He is the world's creator).
debating about this is endless!
aseohosting 5 months ago
perhaps once you hold Islam to the same standard as Christianity then we will take your ideas seriously.
GrandArchitect3D 1 year ago
YAK YAK YAK. THE LONGEST 9:05 MIN. OF MY LIFE. I'M THINKING: I COULD OF HAD A V8. I'M RELATED TO A" KNOWN " HARD CORE ATHEIST IN VA. BUT THE MAN IS INTELLIGENT, HE'S A PSALM 53. This SAME ATHEIST WAS CHASED OUT OF HIS HOME BY DEMONS. INTERESTING, TO YOU, I'M LIKE 'DUDE, YOU GOT TO KNOW THE BIBLE AS WELL AS A THEOLOGIAN BEFORE YOU CAN ATTEMPT TO SLAM IT! YOUR ANSWERS WERE IRRATIONAL & LAUGHABLE. AS 4 ME: DEFEND THE BIBLE? I WOULD AS SOON DEFEND A LION! UNCHAIN IT & IT WILL DEFEND ITSELF!!
Jewels777selah 1 year ago
Comment removed
kroenen5 1 year ago
Thanks for the response, you seemed very cheerful.
Epydemic2020 1 year ago
question 2 is basically asking "do you think a deductive argument, if sound, can prove the existence of God". That is something I would consider an objectively reasonable standard of evidence.
@Q4, Biblically we are not called to stone people etc. Jesus did not say to do those things. You seem to be referring to ceremonial Jewish law back in a period of theocracy and prior to Jesus in Matthew 5:17 fulfilling Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Epydemic2020 1 year ago
Interestingly you seem to allude to the problem of hiddnness in your response to #1. That is ironic, because a discussion on the problem of hiddenness I had been having actually inspired the first 3 questions. The last two were more of an afterthought to find out if Christians come off as hypocrites, and if Christian behavior makes people more or less tolerant of Christian ideas and arguments.
Epydemic2020 1 year ago
You answer to number 1 is very interesting. You do not know what would convince you. Does that mean you cannot phathom a reasonable standard of evidence for God's existence, or does that mean that a reasonable standard of evidence would fail to persuade you?
I am not sure I grant the assumption that God should convince you. Perhaps He is only obligated to provide a reasonable standard of evidence and the rest is up to you.
Epydemic2020 1 year ago
The reason I do not include the logically contradictory as something an omnipotent being can do, is because logically contradictory things are nonsense. To say that a being should be capable of doing nonsense is a nonsensical requirement, ironically.
I don't think that God "created" the laws of logic. The laws of logic seem to express how reality works, and reality would work in a way consistent with how God's mind naturally works (if He is the world's creator).
Epydemic2020 1 year ago