But What If You're Wrong ...

[Logicman]

Then that being isn't omniscient. Omniscient beings know all.

He knows what you do but doesn't make your decisions for you.

 

[Logicman]

You know....I've never understood that so-called choice. As I understand it, the deal is:
A: Accept Christ and after death go to Heaven and have eternal life and happiness.
B. Reject Christ and after death suffer horrific punishment for ever.

Assuming one believes the premises of the choice (that God and Jesus exist and those are the terms etc) who do you think is actually choosing eternal punishment as a preferable and a free choice?

All those who reject Christ. They've heard the Gospel message about Jesus. And those who haven't that will be taken into account at the Judgment.

 

[pinqy]

All those who reject Christ. They've heard the Gospel message about Jesus. And those who haven't that will be taken into account at the Judgment.

No, that's not what I was asking. Is it your claim that there are those who hear the Gospel message, believe that it is true, and decide that no, they prefer eternal damnation? Because otherwise, that's not rejecting Christ.

 

[Logicman]

No, that's not what I was asking. Is it your claim that there are those who hear the Gospel message, believe that it is true, and decide that no, they prefer eternal damnation? Because otherwise, that's not rejecting Christ.

The scriptures are clear. Reject Jesus, whether you believe or not, and you're lost (John 3:36, John 14:6, Acts 4:12, etc.).

 

[pinqy]

The scriptures are clear. Reject Jesus, whether you believe or not, and you're lost (John 3:36, John 14:6, Acts 4:12, etc.).

If someone doesn't believe the Gospel message, how could they possibly accept Christ as their savior?

Your position requires both that there are those who do believe the Gospel message but choose eternal damnation in preference to Christ AND that there are those who do not believe the Gospel message is true and choose to accept Christ.

Do you see how that seems a bit odd to me?

 

[RAMOSS]

The scriptures are clear. Reject Jesus, whether you believe or not, and you're lost (John 3:36, John 14:6, Acts 4:12, etc.).

Funny thing on how people who "reject" Jesus don't accept what the New Testement says about that either. I mean, why bother accept false claims ??

 

[Unrepresented]

He knows what you do but doesn't make your decisions for you.

You're contradicting your previous statement.

Nope. For instance, God hasn't determined whether you will receive or reject Christ as your Lord and Savior. That will be your decision, not God's.

 

[tosca1]

Whatever 'calibre' you are is irrelevant since it is the evidence which counts, not the person providing it.

:roll:



I don't know what you're arguing about. I simply stated a fact!

I'm not saying that those who aren't in the limelight are less credible.

I'm saying that scientists aren't all of the same calibre, which is a fact, since not all scientists have reached the same achievements.

 

[Logicman]

If someone doesn't believe the Gospel message, how could they possibly accept Christ as their savior?

They wouldn't.

Your position requires both that there are those who do believe the Gospel message but choose eternal damnation in preference to Christ AND that there are those who do not believe the Gospel message is true and choose to accept Christ.

Do you see how that seems a bit odd to me?

I never said "that there are those who do not believe the Gospel message is true and choose to accept Christ."

 

[Logicman]

Funny thing on how people who "reject" Jesus don't accept what the New Testement says about that either. I mean, why bother accept false claims ??

The false claims that it's not real are yours, Ramoss.

 

[tosca1]

And that is why I don't like Christians. What arrogance. Close-minded?

Why, yeah.

If rational evidences given by credible people support the possibility of the existence of God, and yet there's hardly any rational evidence to support the non-existence of God - however the person still insists to dismiss the plausability of God's existence and even go so far to conclude that He does not exist - that person is simply close-minded!

What more when that person keep ignoring the evidences repeatedly given - and keep asking, "show me the evidence!" :lol:

Quite a few of the atheists here have been debating with me in several threads, they were given the said evidences....and yet, after several pages,
or a few days later......they'd ask for the evidences again!
I sometimes wonder how old these people are, and if some of them are exhibiting symptoms of alzheimer.

RapidAlpaca is top on the list of those who ignore what was given before, and argue like as if there were no rebuttals at all. I just ignore him now.

As for "rational evidences".. Please use that phrase in a sentence with "supernatural", because that would be hilarious.

Why would that be hilarious? Like I said....there are rational evidences given.

Please, share these rational evidences.

Here are some...

Posts #706 and 707

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...14669-morer-questions-atheist-w-839-a-71.html

 

[pinqy]

They wouldn't.



I never said "that there are those who do not believe the Gospel message is true and choose to accept Christ."

So if it's not possible for them to accept Christ, then how can they be said to reject him? Or deserve punishment for not doing something they can't do?

 

[tosca1]

Assuming one believes the premises of the choice (that God and Jesus exist and those are the terms etc) who do you think is actually choosing eternal punishment as a preferable and a free choice?

Those who still reject Jesus Christ (for whatever reason they may have). They'd made the choice.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Why, yeah.

If rational evidences given by credible people support the possibility of the existence of God, and yet there's hardly any rational evidence to support the non-existence of God - however the person still insists to dismiss the plausability of God's existence and even go so far to conclude that He does not exist - that person is simply close-minded!

What more when that person keep ignoring the evidences repeatedly given - and keep asking, "show me the evidence!" :lol:
Quite a few of the atheists here have been debating with me in several threads, they were given the said evidences....and yet, after several pages, or a few days later......they'd ask for the evidences again!
I sometimes wonder how old these people are, and if some of them are exhibiting symptoms of alzheimer. :mrgreen:





Why would that be hilarious? Like I said....there are rational evidences given.






Here are some...

Posts #706 and 707

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...14669-morer-questions-atheist-w-839-a-71.html

More arrogance..

Let me put this as plainly and as politely as possible. I spent twenty years of my life looking into this subject, not exclusively, but not lightly either. For two decades I maintained an open mind and even belonged to and participated in a church. I have seen all the evidences before, I've heard all the arguments... You have offered nothing new. I carefully weighed and gave much thought and consideration to the matters... And I have come to my conclusion... Though it's not atheism... Or even agnosticism... It's an understanding of what (not who) God is... I believe in a god... The God... I just have a very very different understanding of what that means than you do. And please don't ask me to explain it..., I don't care if you believe what I do or not.

But know this, just because I have arrived at a different understanding than you have, after decades of likely more open research and questioning than you've given it yourself... I think you calling me closed minded is a rather lame DISHONEST JUDGEMENT to make.

good day sir

 

[RAMOSS]

The false claims that it's not real are yours, Ramoss.

Oh, on the contrary..it is you who can not show they are true without using circular reasoning, and appealing to woo, and then getting nasty about it when you get called on it.

Do keep on doing it though. You are the perfect example of the fundamentalist Christian. I am sure that your fine example will lead people to the truth.

 

[tosca1]

More arrogance..

Let me put this as plainly and as politely as possible. I spent twenty years of my life looking into this subject, not exclusively, but not lightly either. For two decades I maintained an open mind and even belonged to and participated in a church. I have seen all the evidences before, I've heard all the arguments... You have offered nothing new. I carefully weighed and gave much thought and consideration to the matters... And I have come to my conclusion... Though it's not atheism... Or even agnosticism... It's an understanding of what (not who) God is... I believe in a god... The God... I just have a very very different understanding of what that means than you do. And please don't ask me to explain it..., I don't care if you believe what I do or not.

But know this, just because I have arrived at a different understanding than you have, after decades of likely more open research and questioning than you've given it yourself... I think you calling me closed minded is a rather lame DISHONEST JUDGEMENT to make.

good day sir

Let's review. This started when you butted in between a poster and I.

Originally Posted by Occam's Razor
Evidence is not proof. Nor is twisting and distorting someone's obvious meaning, evidence.

How smug and self-satisfying.

Here's something for you to consider... Most "atheists" I know are smart. And I can tell you that most have arrived at their belief with no less thought and consideration, study and contemplation that you have yours.

tosca1
You should back up a bit and understand why I responded the way I did. It's because of a boomerang.

I even told you to see why I responded the way I did.

Occam's Razor

The only difference is that one group believes in something they've never seen, and the other doesn't believe in anything they can't see.

tosca1

Correction:

one group believes in something they've never seen which possibility of existence is backed by rational evidences.....

......that the plausibility of its existence far outweighs it being non-existent.

Occam's Razor

To think you are going to change anyone's mind here is silly.

tosca1


Therefore.....to think that any atheists here would change any thinking believer's mind is ......delusional.

And yes, it would be silly of me to think that I'm going to change the mind of anyone who's close-minded.

Did you see that? You said:

To think you are going to change anyone's mind here is silly.

You threw the first punch. But you didn't like my response.

So let's review....you butted in between me and another poster without even understanding why I responded the way I did, then you threw the first punch,

and then you decided I was referring to you personally! :lol:



Don't be such a cry baby.

 

[tosca1]

And I have come to my conclusion... Though it's not atheism... Or even agnosticism... It's an understanding of what (not who) God is... I believe in a god... The God... I just have a very very different understanding of what that means than you do. And please don't ask me to explain it..., I don't care if you believe what I do or not.

But know this, just because I have arrived at a different understanding than you have, after decades of likely more open research and questioning than you've given it yourself... I think you calling me closed minded is a rather lame DISHONEST JUDGEMENT to make.

good day sir

You're not even an atheist! .....so what on earth are you on about?


You butted in on page 29

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philosophical-discussions/225473-but-if-youre-wrong-29.html

and responded to my response to another poster. Here's what I wrote:

:roll:

You really take so many liberties with that term, "atheist." :lol:

"an atheist to nearly every religion?"

Unless you've also changed the definition of religion, as far as I know, religion means the service and worship of God or the supernatural.

You're saying, an atheist can also worship a god or the supernatural. :lamo

One thing is clear....that word, "atheist," is the most fleeeeeeexible word on this planet! :lol: And that's the only thing that's consistent.

Need we wonder why you guys come up with so many variations as to what an atheist is?
See how illogical that is? You support my claim. There's the proof if we ever need one! You just gave it.


I rest my case.

....and you think I was referring to you??? :lamo

 

[pinqy]

Those who still reject Jesus Christ (for whatever reason they may have). They'd made the choice.

What reason would someone have to want to be tortured for eternity? That would have to be an insane person. So, God punishes only the insane and those Not capable of accepting Christ (because they don't believe the choice exists)

Again, that's just odd.

 

[Occam's Razor]

You're not even an atheist! .....so what on earth are you on about?


You butted in on page 29

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philosophical-discussions/225473-but-if-youre-wrong-29.html

and responded to my response to another poster. Here's what I wrote:



....and you think I was referring to you??? :lamo

Im not Christian either. The bible, while a good rule of thumb to get along in society... Is otherwise, imho, hokum.

And I, unlike you, do not claim my beliefs are the only path to heaven. Nor do I believe in a heaven or hell.

Still laughing?

 

[tosca1]

What reason would someone have to want to be tortured for eternity? That would have to be an insane person. So, God punishes only the insane and those Not capable of accepting Christ (because they don't believe the choice exists) Again, that's just odd.

Same question to ask those who'd choose to commit murder/crimes in states or places that has the death penalty! You read about Americans or Canadian who'd commit crimes in third world countries that don't practice democracy (of all places)!

Some people don't want to accept Christ because they don't agree with the rules that comes with following Christ. They've been easily swayed and influenced by arguments that promote atheism or other religions.

Some atheists (mostly former Christians) are what you'd call....very angry atheists. They're angry for whatever personal reasons they may have.

 

[tosca1]

Im not Christian either. The bible, while a good rule of thumb to get along in society... Is otherwise, imho, hokum.

And I, unlike you, do not claim my beliefs are the only path to heaven. Nor do I believe in a heaven or hell.

Still laughing?

So what if you're not a Christian???? Suddenly you seem to have difficulty understanding my post to the other poster!

Whatever.

You don't read. Good day.

 

[Logicman]

So if it's not possible for them to accept Christ, then how can they be said to reject him? Or deserve punishment for not doing something they can't do?

The answer to that is in Romans chapter 1. You can Google it.

 

[Logicman]

Oh, on the contrary..it is you who can not show they are true without using circular reasoning, and appealing to woo, and then getting nasty about it when you get called on it.

Do keep on doing it though. You are the perfect example of the fundamentalist Christian. I am sure that your fine example will lead people to the truth.

Ramoss, don't bother me with your nonsense.

 

[roguenuke]

Tell me about the voodoo ceremonies you're regularly practicing.

Who needs ceremonies. Believing those gods can exist doesn't mean I do or have to worship any of them.

 

[winston53660]

Some people don't want to accept Christ because they don't agree with the rules that comes with following Christ.

Can you list these rules?