Fred

Why do theists even bother coming to an atheist site ? I feel their reasons can't be honest. How they can stand before others who do not believe their arguments and constantly say "truth" is beyond me ?
There is a thread called "What is the nature of Biblical inspiration" that I probably side tracked. I felt that to say "Biblical inspiration" in the first place assumes far too much.
Mind you, I am still learning my way through the site.

fides

Actuality proceeds potentiality.

The Chicken came first.

Spenser

It is one thing to make unassociated statements, its another to explain why. Besides, I prefer steak!

Wyz_sub10

In terms of evolution, the egg most definitely came first (not surprisingly, though, the egg contained a wee little chicken).

Spenser

In the famous words of a famous person at famous time for some famous reason:

"Duh!"

diana

Spenser,

Perhaps they skimmed over it all, just as I did, and brushed off what you yourself agree is a "simple" argument. Or maybe they didn't get to your argument at the end of a rant most of us have read in various forms more times than we can count.

At any rate, you don't present yourself as a person who is prepared to have rational discourse when you say things like "insecure theists"--presumably because none of them have deigned to respond to your "simple argument." That's as irrational and egotistical as calling a woman a lesbian because she won't go out with you (unless you're a woman, of course ).

It bears noting that the "theists that seem to love arguing here" are anything but insecure. If you want to see "insecure," check out the Baptist Board, say, where admitted nonbelievers are not even allowed to register.

Fred,

I suspect they come here because they enjoy discussing theology and philosophy, just as we do. They believe they are right, just as we do. Why do you feel their reasons "can't be honest"?

I've registered and posted at many Christian sites over the past two or three years. Each time, I'm met with people speculating about why I would do such a thing. They usually decide I'm there because I'm seeking Christ, and no amount of explanation sways them from this assumption, which is just as presumptious and insulting as yours, which is the converse, above.

Why does it have to have any deeper meaning? You collect stamps to relax. He watches football. Gramma gardens. I discuss philosophy.

Because they honestly believe they're right, just as you do, and are probably frustrated that they can't explain it in terms you can understand or that you just don't seem to be listening.

Just like you do when you're dealing with them.

Please proceed with the discussion, gentlemen, but enough of the baiting. If your question is a good one, just write it--sans loaded language--and they will come.

d

Spenser

[If you wish to continue this thread with the light-hearted banter it currently enjoys and not give it an opportunity for serious discussion, please let me know and I will whisk it Elsewhere posthaste, and you can frolic to your heart's content.

However, EoG is a higher forum. We have higher expectations of behavior here. I've left this thread here thus far because I think you made a point in your OP that merits serious discussion. However, I will not allow rude comments directed at other posters.

If you wish to vent your spleen about my moderating decisions, take your complaints to the Bugs, Problems and Complains forum and I will engage you there. This is not the place.

-d]

Spenser

[Last warning. Take it to Bugs, Problem and Complaints if you want to argue with my moderation decision. -d]

Spenser

And since I am being instructed to get back to the arguement I'll repost just it:

beastmaster

Most Xns believe that god became a man about 2000 years ago and then was nailed to a 2x4. God thereby gained experiential knowledge as to what it means to be human (so the story goes). If god can turn himself into a human, I don't see why he can't turn himself into a rock or can't become you in order to gain experiential knowledge.

As for your speculation that god would not be able to convert back to god if he became a rock, well, that just assumes that god is limited by normal space-time. I spose God could easily create a bend or loop in time or reverse the arrow of time so that he would revert back to being god at the "end" of his experiment in being a rock. I'm sure god could come up with other cool ways to test drive being someone/something else without permanently relinquishing his powers.

In any event the notion that god is omnipotent/omniscient is merely a fanciful reading of certain poetic glorifying phrases in the Bible. There are lots of points in the Bible where god is portrayed as having limited powers. Pointing out absurdities in the omnimax god is fun, but really doesn't address the god of the Bible.