FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-07-2003, 09:36 AM   #51
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Default

Magus said:

There is no inbetween. There is Hot and Cold, Good and Evil, Heaven and Hell. You make the choice between those - you don't get to make up more options.

Then what was Jesus getting on about with all that talk about the "lukewarm"?

Rev 3: 15-16 - I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
Mageth is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 09:45 AM   #52
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
Im assuming you mean infant baptism in water? That does absolutely nothing except get the child wet. I consider the Roman Catholic Church and its false doctrines to be mostly heresy, so not even gonna get into the discussion on infant baptism. Baptism by water doesn't save, and infant baptism is worthless - with no scriptural backing whatsoever.
Quite the contrary. Read this, which includes quite a bit of "scriptural backing" for infant baptism.

And where in the Bible does it teach against the sacrament of infant baptism?
Mageth is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 09:49 AM   #53
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 8,473
Default

Magus,

You said:

"NO ONE is innocent. Apparently you haven't learned that yet."

Right. Let's speak cases.

Please tell me precisely what guilt I carry.

No messing around, now. I would like dates, times, places etc. You're the one making the claim, so please back it up.
Nialler is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 10:01 AM   #54
Beloved Deceased
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: rural part of los angeles, CA
Posts: 4,516
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by EstherRose
Quote:
Don't you know that a refusal to answer is an admission of defeat?
I am asking this of the moderators: does this statement reflect the views of this board and majority of it's members?
As administrator, I concur with the response Celsus provided.

Certainly some debate styles are more effective than others while another might be frustrating, elusive, obfuscating, etc.. Aside from maintaining the forum rules, the IIDB staff does not dictate the format of general discussions. The statement above may or may not reflect the opinion of other users, but it is not board policy and the administration does not have any official views on this sort of issue.
pescifish is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 10:08 AM   #55
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Delaware
Posts: 14
Default

I'm new to this board but not this debate.

Is there free will. Certainly at least not for everyone if you take the bible as your source. Read Exodus. Pharoh didn't have free will when Moses told him to "Let my people go." God hardened his heart.

Also does God have foreknowledge. If that is the case he can never be compared to a parent who says to his child not to do something. He would know when and where it would happen and would stop it. Also what is the purpose of the Tree of KoG&E? God already had the knowledge and didn't need to eat the fruit. He put the tree there for a reason, because he wanted man to fall. He didn't want to save everyone.

The NT talks about how God is love. The OT talks about God being jealous and angry. The bible also says that God does not change. It means therefore that God cannot love everyone. How many people in the OT were killed over blasphemy or whims of God? It is in the millions including women and children.

Children were often slaughtered because God specifically commanded that they be put to death. Read Joshua, I & II Kings, Chronicles, Isiah, etc.
abospaum is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 11:11 AM   #56
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 1,505
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
I consider the Roman Catholic Church and its false doctrines to be mostly heresy, so not even gonna get into the discussion on infant baptism.
Could you explain to me how you justify identifying Catholic doctrine as heretical? They are the only church which has maintained a direct line of apostolic tradition through the centuries. How can the original church your denomination is a derivative of be classified as heretical? If anything, you are the heretic!

-Mike...
mike_decock is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 02:11 PM   #57
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
NO ONE is innocent. Apparently you haven't learned that yet.
Then stop peddling the argument of the age of accountability then. If they cannot be held accountable, they cannot be judged guilty.
winstonjen is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 02:17 PM   #58
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
Im assuming you mean infant baptism in water? That does absolutely nothing except get the child wet. I consider the Roman Catholic Church and its false doctrines to be mostly heresy, so not even gonna get into the discussion on infant baptism. Baptism by water doesn't save, and infant baptism is worthless - with no scriptural backing whatsoever.
But Jesus was baptised in water, so unless you want to claim that what Jesus did was worthless, your argument fails.

Baptising someone in fire (hell) does nothing except turn them to ash. No remedial value whatsoever.
winstonjen is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 02:21 PM   #59
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nialler
Magus,

You said:

"NO ONE is innocent. Apparently you haven't learned that yet."

Right. Let's speak cases.

Please tell me precisely what guilt I carry.

No messing around, now. I would like dates, times, places etc. You're the one making the claim, so please back it up.
[fundy mode]
Crime 1: Being born.
Crime 2: Not worshipping Jesus.
Crime 3: Not worshipping the Father.
Crime 4: Not worshipping the Holy Spook.
Crime 5: Being your father's son/daughter.
Crime 6: Being your mother's son/daughter.
[/fundy mode]

How was that, Magus? Rather accurate?
winstonjen is offline  
Old 07-07-2003, 04:51 PM   #60
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Mageth
Magus said:

There is no inbetween. There is Hot and Cold, Good and Evil, Heaven and Hell. You make the choice between those - you don't get to make up more options.

Then what was Jesus getting on about with all that talk about the "lukewarm"?

Rev 3: 15-16 - I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
Did you bother to read it? Its the scriptural explanation of what I just said. You can't be in the middle ( lukewarm) - you are either Hot or Cold, for God or against, and God knows this. Those who are lukewarm haven't made a decision ( this may refer to Agnostics) and will be counted towards the cold side. They wont win any "points" with God for saying, I don't know and don't really care.
Magus55 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:22 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.