Well, after breaking 2000 comments on the previous thread, I think it’s time to move to a new one. Feel free to continue the conversation here.
Also, I want to make a note about future posts. The tone on this blog for the last month or so has been decidedly different than what it used to be. While that’s definitely made things interesting, I’d like to move back to a tone more in line with the way things used to be. So going forward, I want the comments on all new posts to remain civil. We can all make our points, and I expect to see a wide range of opinions. But I don’t want to get into name-calling and bashing when we can’t all agree on particular issues. Let’s try to stay focused on the points and not get side-tracked with personal stuff. Let’s also keep each comment substantive so we don’t rack up so many comments in such a short period of time that it’s hard for everyone to keep track.
If you don’t feel like you can participate within those guidelines, then feel free to continue posting within this thread (and any future “Kathy” threads, if they’re needed), because I won’t be enforcing any guidelines here. But if you want to comment on any other posts, you’ll need to abide by the rules I just laid out. Otherwise, your comment will be subject to deletion, and after a warning, you might find yourself banned from at least that thread, if not the entire blog.
If there are any questions, let me know.
Thanks
I’m trying to show that your CHOICE of rejecting God goes AGAINST the odds. And because of that, it proves your bias/ lack of objectivity.
What happened to 50/50 odds, Kathy? You used your own logic to come up with that number. So 50/50 wouldn’t be going against the odds either way. That’s pretty much a draw – not that I even agree with this 50/50 odds business.
Now, even if I did agree with this 50/50 business that was your odds for there being a creator god, not Bible God. You haven’t even come close to showing how you get from creator god to Bible God.
LikeLike
“No. It means that Nate was incorrect when he claimed that lack of objectivity couldn’t be a factor.” – kathy
how would you honestly and objectively know without reading the book?
LikeLike
I’ve NEVER talked about “the fires” Ruth. I’ve been very careful when addressing what happens to non believers according to the Bible. It seems that I should just not talk about that at all.. but for Christians it’s a reality and it’s a critical part of the picture.
What exactly are you talking about, then, when you talk about what happens to non believers according to the Bible?
LikeLike
Remarkable and bewilderingly astonishing!
I give it two thumbs up! So many twists and turns – I still don’t know where I am!
LikeLike
Nate,
“Kathy, if you’re too afraid to read something that may challenge your beliefs, just say so. It’s a bit cowardly to claim you won’t read something because the author isn’t objective when you would have to read him to know. In fact, one might say it’s unobjective.”
Nope, sorry Nate.. that won’t work.. I’m asking for examples.. I’m giving you an opportunity to show me that this book is “different”.. it’s “the one” you’d have me read. I’ve already explained that there are tons of books, some that I have some knowledge of, of the authors.. and they have proven their bias just as you have. I’m not going to waste my time allowing atheists to “convert” me with their own beliefs that have very little supportive evidence. I require some kind of evidence that this author / his book is “different” and unbiased.
And you didn’t address yet another accusation I’ve made of your lack of bias.. with proof.. using your own words. Again, this shows dishonesty and lack of objectivity.
“I have many faults, but one thing I’m proud of its that I have read every single pro-Christian book my dad has asked me to read. I often have trouble getting Christians to return the favor. I wonder who’s being most open-minded?”
The difference between the two is that Christian authors actually do have evidence to back up their beliefs.. the Bible and the evidence that backs it up.
What do atheists have?? They have supposition and opinion based on nothing but a need to not believe in God. What evidence is there that God does NOT exist???
If your book recommendation has compelling evidence, again, I’ll read it.. but I need you to give me some examples Nate.. this shouldn’t be that hard to do.. especially if it’s “the one”.
And Nan did post an example from the book, and I pointed out the fault with the authors thinking.. has there been a reply to my comment from you? Or anyone? I’ve only scanned the comments so far and it doesn’t look like it. Yet, I’m sure many of those comments will be about me and my faults.. liberals.. wow..
LikeLike
Ruth,
“I’ve NEVER talked about “the fires” Ruth. I’ve been very careful when addressing what happens to non believers according to the Bible. It seems that I should just not talk about that at all.. but for Christians it’s a reality and it’s a critical part of the picture.
What exactly are you talking about, then, when you talk about what happens to non believers according to the Bible?”
This is getting ridiculous.. what do you want me to do?? deny what the Bible says?? What I’m trying to convey is that I’m not using it to intimidate or coerce.. but I can’t ignore it either..what exactly do you suggest I do?
LikeLike
“What do atheists have?? They have supposition and opinion based on nothing but a need to not believe in God. What evidence is there that God does NOT exist???” – kathy
…says the person who refuses to read books of non-christians.
LikeLike
This is getting ridiculous.. what do you want me to do?? deny what the Bible says?? What I’m trying to convey is that I’m not using it to intimidate or coerce.. but I can’t ignore it either..what exactly do you suggest I do?
No, I don’t want you to deny what the Bible says. I want you to be honest about what you’ve said. And you have been sure to drop that in there. That we can bow the knee now or later at our own peril, according to your Bible. Yeah, that sounds like love. Sign me up.
LikeLike
“This is getting ridiculous..” – kathy
getting?
LikeLike
“This is getting ridiculous..” – kathy
“getting?” – William
Don’t that beat all?
LikeLike
never talked about fires? Hell doesnt imply hell’s fires? And eternal consequences of “rejecting the bible god” doesnt imply hell?
LikeLike
I’ve been laughing so hard…. i dont have the words to describe this… I have tears…
LikeLike
Ruth,
“I’m trying to show that your CHOICE of rejecting God goes AGAINST the odds. And because of that, it proves your bias/ lack of objectivity.” Kathy
“What happened to 50/50 odds, Kathy? You used your own logic to come up with that number. So 50/50 wouldn’t be going against the odds either way. That’s pretty much a draw – not that I even agree with this 50/50 odds business. ”
Those 50/50 odds are for atheists.. that’s the most odds atheists can have based on their very own “evidence”.. which is none.. because again, neither side has empirical evidence.. hence the 50/50 (whether you understand/ accept it or not).. but when we examine the rest of the non empirical evidence.. the atheists odds drop greatly.. especially since you all have no other possibility/ explanation. Christians have the Bible, that has not been disprove and has much evidence to support it’s Truth.
LikeLike
Christians have the Bible, that has not been disprove and has much evidence to support it’s Truth.
There has been a lot of evidence that disproves the Bible you just refuse to look at it. “Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil.” The only things your interested in looking at are evidences that confirm your bias. You’ve proven that over and over again by refusing to read resources offered to you and claiming their bias without ever investigating it for yourself.
LikeLike
“Those 50/50 odds are for atheists.. that’s the most odds atheists can have based on their very own “evidence”.. which is none.. because again, neither side has empirical evidence.. hence the 50/50 (whether you understand/ accept it or not).. but when we examine the rest of the non empirical evidence.. the atheists odds drop greatly.. especially since you all have no other possibility/ explanation. Christians have the Bible, that has not been disprove and has much evidence to support it’s Truth.”
neither side has emperical evidnece so you then say that we should all accept supernatural claims just because they cant be disproven?
Aliens havent been disproven. Unicorns havent been disproven. bigfoot, the big bang, evolution, a really old earth…
you know, when you get right down to it, there isnt much that has been disproven… are you suggesting we believe every non-disproven thing?
or maybe, outrageous claims should be proven or at least have good and unique evidence before we buy into it.
You’re not making much sense. Take the weekend off, reread all three threads before coming back. seriously.
LikeLike
“No, I don’t want you to deny what the Bible says. I want you to be honest about what you’ve said. And you have been sure to drop that in there. That we can bow the knee now or later at our own peril, according to your Bible. Yeah, that sounds like love. Sign me up.”
And where did I deny that I’ve mentioned what happens to unbelievers? No where.. I’ve acknowledged that I’ve addressed it. But even though you can’t grasp yet another point.. I’m not using it to intimidate.. it’s what the Bible says. And I’m not going to deny that.
This IS another of the basic issues with atheists/ liberals… you all are easily intimidated.. you resent anyone who you feel “threatened” by.. nothing else matters.. it doesn’t matter if God loves you.. or that He died for you or gave you your life.. none of that matters as much as you feeling “threatened”.. is this an ego and pride issue?.. I believe so.
And this liberal mentality shows itself in every view you all have.. political and social and personal. It’s all about the ego being threatened.. it’s about someone else having that perceived “control” over you. It’s all about YOU.. not what God has done for you.
LikeLike
besides, if you refuse to look at other arguments, i guess it would be easy to claim nothing refutes your beliefs.
You’re so unbiased and objective.
LikeLike
Kathy,
If I had a child and wrote that child a letter and then disappeared but then threatened that child with torture if the child didn’t chase after me would that look like love?
LikeLike
kathy, you’re bible is a book of wild and unsubstantiated claims that differnt men have made. You believe them.
You believe those claims because of :
1) martyrs, even though every religion and many non-religions have them.
2) our very existence – which no one knows how that started, but even if you must land on god(s), you must go back to that book of claims to get to jesus.
3) there were miracles, but as it turns out, those dont happen today, and end up being more claims by the same men who claim they speak for god.
4) the fulfilled prophecies we’ve discussed weren’t really prophecies at all, or had to be viewed so figuratively that it’s difficult to show anything precise about them other than location (maybe) in order to claim they’re actually fulfilled.
5) 40 authors taking 1500 years to write the bible. But there’s nothing miraculous about men writing books, editing books, and being inspired to write a book or letter after reading an older book.
am I wrong, and have I missed anything?
what makes these claims credible?
How are you unbiased and objective if you refuse to read any suggested books, like Thomas paine’s “age of reason?”
Why should truth hide? If it’s bogus, then you’ll be better able to refute it after having read it. I mean, if you’re looking for reasons not to read it, any will do.
I think you’d rather talk about liberals and argue over who’s more objective than discuss these topics (and they happen to be the real ones).
LikeLike
“So many twists and turns – I still don’t know where I am!” – she must be running down, her arguments are getting weaker and weaker.
LikeLike
And I cant help but think the whole, “I don’t have time to address or read all the bad points” comment is only just an excuse to avoid the real issues.
LikeLike
“What evidence is there that God does NOT exist???” – The best kind of all – the very simple evidence, that there is no evidence that a god DOES exist!
LikeLike
Nan,
“Obviously Kathy is not the adventurous type. She would rather stay in her little cocoon of safety and read her beloved book (you know, the one written by her “all-loving god”) than to venture into a world that might conflict with her cozy and warm belief system. ”
Kathy, no one says you have to agree with any of the books we’ve suggested. If fact, you can sit there and shake your head throughout the entire book. All we’re asking is that you open that very closed mind for just a little while and allow some new thoughts to enter. Besides, rather than change your thinking, it might give you new ammunition to use against us heathens. HA!
Nan, did you have a response to my claim about Nate’s book recommendation based on your example? It doesn’t look like it.. why not? That you didn’t respond but yet you proceed to criticize me for not reading a book I’ve just proven is faulty in it’s reasoning, shows how problematic, biased and unobjective liberal reasoning/ thinking is.
It might not make sense to you/ liberals why I wouldn’t want to read a book full of bias towards your beliefs.. but objective reasonable people won’t have any trouble at all of understanding this.
LikeLike
Hi Howie! Its been so busy that every time I think I might chime in, and try to irritate Nate and Arch a bit, I get on and there are a hundred new comments that I don’t have time to read! Lol!
I am siding with Kathy, even though she is an obvious Paul supporter, and our beliefs are quite different! Hopefully she will step it up, and give some answers that aren’t opinion based, and if I have time I will chime in later.
Hope things are well with you!
LikeLike