Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Baloo · 03-27-2003, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by xian
You have access to a book called the Bible. This book is the book from which all those opinions on God are derived from. If you formulate your opinion of God simply based on other people's interpretation of the Bible when you have full access to it you are not making a good effort to have the most informed opinion possible.

True.

Quote:

If your test was genuine, then I would naturally assume that you have made the best effort possible to learn about the identity and claims of the Christian God in addition to the testimony of its followers. To put short, I assumed you would have read, at least in part...the Bible.

In addition to the hundreds of sunday school lessons, bible studies, devotionals, sermons, and (teaching of) VBS lessons, in 8th grade, I followed a 1-year plan by which I read, and dwelled upon, every word of the NIV bible over the course of a year. On all of the above, I base my statement that I do not see the J/C God as a fictitious cruel being.

Quote:

I do believe that the material necessary to formulate an opinion on the question "Do you see God as cruel" is ample...more than enough.

Please demonstrate this, then, by telling us whether you see God as cruel?

xian · 03-27-2003, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baloo

In addition to the hundreds of sunday school lessons, bible studies, devotionals, sermons, and (teaching of) VBS lessons, in 8th grade, I followed a 1-year plan by which I read, and dwelled upon, every word of the NIV bible over the course of a year. On all of the above, I base my statement that I do not see the J/C God as a fictitious cruel being.

i believe you.

Quote:

Please demonstrate this, then, by telling us whether you see God as cruel?

i answered that in my last post. the answer is no.

edit: i see now that my answer may have been interpreted to answer the "are you offended"....but I meant no as in "I do not see God as cruel"

Baloo · 03-27-2003, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by xian

edit: i see now that my answer may have been interpreted to answer the "are you offended"....but I meant no as in "I do not see God as cruel"

LOL - glad to hear it... when I first read it, it came across like "No, it doesn't offend me, and no, I'll not give you the answer, nyah!".

Anyway, it seems we have reached a common ground (I may be wrong). You would never ask an atheist "what would it take", or, if you did, you wouldn't really be interested in the response. As such, there's very little left to discuss between you and I in a thread which is specifically in response to that question. It's been fun, though, and I thank you for the dialogue.

xian · 03-27-2003, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baloo
LOL - glad to hear it... when I first read it, it came across like "No, it doesn't offend me, and no, I'll not give you the answer, nyah!".

Anyway, it seems we have reached a common ground (I may be wrong). You would never ask an atheist "what would it take", or, if you did, you wouldn't really be interested in the response. As such, there's very little left to discuss between you and I in a thread which is specifically in response to that question. It's been fun, though, and I thank you for the dialogue.

well don't get me wrong, I have asked the quesiton before. but for many people the question is basically this:

"What would it take for you to know for sure God exists such that you need no faith that God exists?"

given my understanding of God:
if He exists, and your test is genuine, he will reveal himself to you in a way in which you are not expecting, yet will not negate the need for faith...or perhaps he already has but you missed it.
and yes, thank you for the conversation. a few bumps, but overall enjoyable. i apologize for my criticisms of you. i can tell you are a nice guy.

Pyrrho · 03-27-2003, 10:35 PM

86435135646132135463546997933110

Baloo · 03-28-2003, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pyrrho
86435135646132135463546997933110

I'd Posted Earlier:

Quote:

Not a slight at anyone, but it really does take me about 2 minutes to check each of these guesses, so I'm going to make Curt's the last "insincere" guess checked. Curt, you've matched 6 digits (hey, a new record). From here on, if you are a theist, and you want to be a prophet of sorts for a specific deity, please state/define the deity you represent and your guess. You may do so publicly on this thread, or privately (in a PM). If by PM, please let me whether I should reveal the results, whether I should reveal your name, etc.

Pyrrho · 03-28-2003, 09:28 AM

You state:

Quote:

Not a slight at anyone, but it really does take me about 2 minutes to check each of these guesses, so I'm going to make Curt's the last "insincere" guess checked.

And this seems to also mean that you are only going to check the guesses of the insane.

Well, of course, now the condition of your calculator is different from when the prediction was made, so you will no longer obtain the number I specified. You needn't bother checking any one else's numbers, since they all represent false gods anyway, so it would only be by chance that they might get it right.

Too bad for you, as you would have found me an easy to please god, as I would not have required A, B, D, or E, and the requirements for C would not involve most of what you list. You can no longer honestly say that you did not have an opportunity to know god; you had your chance, and you threw it away.

Philosoft · 03-28-2003, 09:51 AM

This has gotten kind of silly. Any reasons why this thread should stay in EoG, now's the time.

~Philosoft - EoG mod

xian · 03-28-2003, 10:09 AM

i can think of no reason. baloo and i had a good conversation about the topic, but i think that has been put to rest.

Baloo · 03-28-2003, 10:23 AM

FWIW, it died a fairly natural death a year ago, and seems to be quickly approaching that point now. I'd like for it to be kept in the forum, because it's a nice one to bump to the top whenever theists start a new "What would it take" thread. If you've grown as weary of it as I hve recently, and you'd like to lock it, I have no problem with that - I'll just PM a moderator if I ever think an "unlock and bump" would be appropriate. However, if it is locked, let me leave a final note:

IF ANY THEISTS STILL WISH TO GUESS, PLEASE PM ME YOUR GUESS, YOUR DEITY, ETC.

03-27-2003, 10:35 PM	#235
Pyrrho Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: United States Posts: 7,351	86435135646132135463546997933110 86435135646132135463546997933110

03-28-2003, 10:23 AM	#240
Baloo Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 417	How about a lock instead of a move? FWIW, it died a fairly natural death a year ago, and seems to be quickly approaching that point now. I'd like for it to be kept in the forum, because it's a nice one to bump to the top whenever theists start a new "What would it take" thread. If you've grown as weary of it as I hve recently, and you'd like to lock it, I have no problem with that - I'll just PM a moderator if I ever think an "unlock and bump" would be appropriate. However, if it is locked, let me leave a final note: IF ANY THEISTS STILL WISH TO GUESS, PLEASE PM ME YOUR GUESS, YOUR DEITY, ETC.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-28-2003, 09:51 AM	#238
Philosoft Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Southeast of disorder Posts: 6,829	This has gotten kind of silly. Any reasons why this thread should stay in EoG, now's the time. ~Philosoft - EoG mod

03-28-2003, 10:09 AM	#239
xian Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 378	i can think of no reason. baloo and i had a good conversation about the topic, but i think that has been put to rest.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.