deegee

Joined

• started 23 topics
• posted 476 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by deegee

• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  "He cares in the sense of an afterlife reward."

  Everything is better in the afterlife which cannot be confirmed. Outside of religion, most people would consider such unverifiable promises to be fraudulent.

  The afterlife reward only serves to prove that the notion that Jesus' sacrifice paid the "debt" to settle the account is nothing more than a sham and a delusion.

  If Christ, by his death, paid the "debt" that is said to have been incurred through sin entering into the world, then why do we still have misery, pain, folly, ignorance, crime, injustice and death in the world?

  Jesus' death on the cross has changed nothing, it did not "put away sin" as promised:

  Hebrews (9:26):
  "Christ appeared "once at the end of the ages" to "put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."

  Suffering, evil, sickness and death still continue. The object of Jesus' death to make a complete satisfaction for all sin, and to remove such sin from the world has not been attained.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  There's no free-will after death.

  Every soul has free-will.

  Which is it?
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  Continuing.......

  "This is a JW concept (sovereignty)."

  Further, God ruined Job's life just to prove that he is God. Wasn't that supposed to have settled the issue? Shouldn't Job’s successful completion of the test have put the issue to rest?
  Wasn't the point of Job's suffering to silence Satan?

  Yet Satan was subsequently cast down to the earth (Revelation 12) and allowed to continue wreaking havoc in people's lives, and to become the "god of this system of things" (1 John 5:19).

  So the issue hasn't been settled then, Job's suffering was all for nothing, his suffering was in vain.

  What's more, Job didn't even know why he suffered, he didn't even know that God was playing a game of chess with his life.

  This makes God the engineer behind the suffering and evil in the world.

  All this time I thought God loved us and wanted the best for us instead God prefers to carry on a pissing contest with Satan at mankind's expense. How many more lives must be ruined before God ends his pissing contest with Satan?

  Again, God is ruining lives just to prove that he is God just like he did with Job.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  It begs to be answered why such an Almighty and loving god would value his reputation more than the endless suffering of the creatures he supposedly caused to exist.

  "This is a JW concept (sovereignty)."

  This is NOT a JW concept. It is a Bible teaching:

  Hebrews (9:26):
  "Christ appeared "once at the end of the ages" to "put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."

  The matter resolves itself into this: Christ either paid the "debt" or he did not. If he did pay it, that should settle the account, and we ought not to be the bothered with it any further.

  As far as I can see sin, evil still exists in the world. It was not "put away" by Jesus' sacrifice as the scripture claims.

  The objective of the death of Christ has not been attained. That object was to make a complete satisfaction for all sin, and to remove such sin from the world. But these objects have not been attained, for mankind has still to secure its own exemption from the supposed effects of sin; and, further, sin still surrounds us. If Christ, by his death, paid the debt that is said to have been incurred through sin entering into the world, why should man be required to make a second payment?

  As to the boasted victories of the cross, where are they? We have still misery, pain, folly, ignorance, crime, and injustice in the world. The erection of the cross has not frightened the miscreant nor appalled the tyrant. The voice from the height of Calvary has not destroyed error nor cemented truth; neither has the death of Christ produced that condition of society in which it is impossible for man to be depraved and poor. If, as we are told, the Savior has come, it may be fairly asked, "Whence comes salvation?"
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  BTW, what's the difference between "intellect" and "the ability to decide, the will", as per your definitions of reason given above?
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  How are you able to distinguish what your brain does from what your immaterial soul does?
  "The first step is to check out the animal behaviour in other species and see differences and similarities."

  You also stated:

  BTW, where does your reason come from? Your immaterial soul or your brain?
  "Both if you mean reason as intellect."

  Animals do not have the ability to reason, so using your difference in animal behaviour versus human behaviour argument as a basis for determining what your immaterial soul does, why didn't you just attribute the ability to reason solely to your soul? Why include your brain as well?
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  In any event, I'm baffled that a devout Catholic like you views contacting demons as BS when the Catholic church is infamously known for its legendary exorcisms.

  Exorcism is not communication.

  Apparently I should have provided some more details in my comment in order to make my point.

  According to you:

  "Spiritism/Spiritualism is BS"

  - that is, it is BS regardless of the TYPE of discarnate spirit being contacted be it the spirit of the "conscious" dead OR A DEMON.

  Yet the Catholic Church certainly does NOT believe that contacting/communicating with demons is BS since it can lead to demon possession which in turn will require an exorcism.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  Cofty,

  Reality and theology don't fit. In lots of little ways theism doesn't pass the common-sense test.

  Well has it been said that:
  

  Christianity is true for those who need it to be true.
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  BTW, where does your reason come from? Your immaterial soul or your brain?
  "Both if you mean reason as intellect.

  What's the point of God creating an immaterial soul that does the same thing as the brain? Why the duplication?
  

  "But the ability to decide, the will, comes entirely from the soul."

  How are you able to distinguish what your brain does from what your immaterial soul does?
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  deegee

  John_Mann,

  "For instance you interpret these events like being communication with the dead. But there's an interpretation this event is about communication with demons."

  Your argument was never about the TYPE of discarnate spirit (spirit of the "conscious" dead or a demon) which a spiritist/medium contacts.

  Your argument was simply that:

  "Spiritism/Spiritualism is BS"

  - that is, it is BS regardless of the TYPE of discarnate spirit being contacted be it the spirit of the "conscious" dead or a demon.
  

  In any event, I'm baffled that a devout Catholic like you views contacting demons as BS when the Catholic church is infamously known for its legendary exorcisms.

  Just for the record here's one scripture which explicitly warns against communicating with/consulting the dead via a medium:

  Deuteronomy 18:9-12:

  "When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who CONSULTS THE DEAD. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord."