demonology and angelic heiarchy

[tbombz]

You know for an absolute fact that you have not been given any proof?

And you also know for an absolute fact that supernatural revelation is impossible?

Can you prove these assertions mathematically?

[The Ugly]

1) Even if I had witnessed a literal resurrection..... you still wouldn't believe me, so what difference does it make?

2) You don't think that it is loving and sacrificial for God to become a human being and then allow people to physically torture him to death?  

3) Loving judgement.... as in, you can trust that God will not condemn anyone who is legitimately innocent. God loves your friends and your family more than you do, and you can trust that He will judge with love and mercy.

4) Just don't be surprised when your friends and family's hearts and minds are revealed and they turn out to be a thousand times uglier and more evil than you ever imagined was a possibility.

5) The Bible actually teaches that a person will be judged based on their own merits. We all do inherit a sinful nature, but if we never went above and beyond that inherent sinful nature then God would not condemn us to hell. It is because we go above and beyond, way beyond, our sinful nature that each of us is individually condemned.

Unless we repent and trust in the Savior.

1) None, because it obviously couldn't happen. Just commenting on the probable chance and/or subjective nature likely attached to your experiences. But for the archive: Are you, in fact, claiming to have witnessed a resurrection?

2) Loving? No. Completely unnecessary and sadistic as fuck. Didn't need it, and it never had to happen. God built a faulty product, knowing beforehand it would fail. Ultimately, that's on Him. Furthermore, inherited sin is illogical bullshit - and even if we accept the premise, plenty of nonviolent, PG-13 alternatives He could've employed instead. Scrap everything or simply hit reset? He alone chose the masochistic bloodlust because that's who the new authors decided He was.

Also, based on His obscene ego in the OT, don't believe for a second He actually endured the full crucuifixion experience. I'd feel more pity for the thousands of others - the true humans - knowing there was no hocus pocus out-of-body, or nerve ending shenaniganism and whatnot to help mitigate suffering.

3) Empty rhetoric, friend. Truth: Faith in the Lord is a paradise requirement, correct? Some, like myself, are born skeptics. We have no faith gene; hence nonbelief, hence hell. This is the part many of your ilk won't acknowledge. Guess it's just like me with your resurrection, you would neither believe nor understand. So hard for me to buy 'fair judgment.'

And, dude, if He loves my friends/family so damn much, why do they keep coming to ME for fucking money? You have no idea how much I wanna reply to one of these retarded "God is soooo good" Facebook posts, after I just Western Unioned them another 1500 bucks. I'd quite enjoy posting a little fuck you truth to their prayer warriors. Then 'Like' my own shit, the dummies.

4) Wait, huh? What's this got to do with Chinese tea? Sounds personal, but fuck 'em.

5) Eh, not really. We behave for the most part, far as important stuff goes. Real morality, I mean, not mindcrimes, sycophantic worship, or alienating friends/family with annoying proselytizing and such. But how is any of this really about morality? I'd even argue we're more moral these days, when judged objectively. Remove God from the equation, pretty hard to make a case for much of biblical morality.

And bottom line: Any God who prioritizes belief over deeds really isn't worth worshipping. Certainly wouldn't want to spend eternity with such an insecure narcissist.

[tbombz]

Ugly, your not the only one who was born a skeptic with no faith gene!

I remember being taken to "Sunday school" (although it was on a Wednesday) as a young child, around the age of 8 or 9, and thinking to myself how stupid religion was, and how obvious it was that people only believe in God because they are afraid to die.

I was a die-hard atheist for the first 20 years of my life, and I was able to argue against religious belief as good as any popular atheistic intellectual.

If your at all interested in this subject, you may be interested in Anthony Flew! He was the "Richard Dawkins" of the 20th century, one of the most famous atheists of all time!

[The Ugly]

Ugly, your not the only one who was born a skeptic with no faith gene!

I remember being taken to "Sunday school" (although it was on a Wednesday) as a young child, around the age of 8 or 9, and thinking to myself how stupid religion was, and how obvious it was that people only believe in God because they are afraid to die.

I was a die-hard atheist for the first 20 years of my life, and I was able to argue against religious belief as good as any popular atheistic intellectual.

If your at all interested in this subject, you may be interested in Anthony Flew! He was the "Richard Dawkins" of the 20th century, one of the most famous atheists of all time!

Here's my child skeptic: Mom drug the family to some urgent service about the upcoming rapture, double feature to follow: A Distant Thunder/Thief in the Night (both on YouTube). Total mindfuck for a kid who just wants to play ball, right? Death, suffering, torture, hell, coming soon and all. Afterward, another hour or so discussing, getting saved, etc. Scariest, most depressing shit ever.

The whole night, through the sermon, the movies, our chat, I had ONE thought: Do we get a second chance?

I was so entirely convinced I COULDN'T believe, I knew I'd never make the first cut. But I figured, hell, if I actually see Jesus come down from the sky, that'll convince me, right? So maybe there's some second chance loophole? Die without the mark or whatever, I didn't know.

Point being, that's what I'd need in order to believe.

Everyone just dismissed my concerns, because, "Just believe, son, no worries," like it's that easy.  

Understood then that I couldn't simply choose to believe; learned, too, that some folks think you can, which probably explains the 'chose to be gay' mentality. Also reveals one of the flaws in Pascal's Wager.

[avxo]

You know for an absolute fact that you have not been given any proof?

I'm telling you that I haven't been given proof. This is a fact - I don't have a proof for the existence of a deity which I keep tucked away in a drawer, safely out of sight and out of mind. What more do you need? Are you going to suggest that you feel you've been given a proof and that that proof should be good enough for me too? Sorry - that's not how this work.

And you also know for an absolute fact that supernatural revelation is impossible?

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that it isn't. Let's also assume that something is supernaturally revealed to me. What good is it? I could never hope to convince someone else that the experience was real and not the result of a hallucination. Hell, I might not even be able to convince myself of that.

Is supernatural revelation possible? Well, many things are possible. It's possible, for example, that tomorrow at noon Pacific time, NASA engineers unveil faster-than-light propulsion. It's not likely, but it's possible.

But that's not even the biggest problem. The problem is that the question "is supernatural the revelation possible" is flawed. What does the term "supernatural revelation" mean? How does one distinguish it from "natural" revelation? How does it purport to work? What does it mean to be "outside of nature"?

Can you prove these assertions mathematically?

You are the one claiming that supernatural revelation is possible and suggesting it's a viable mechanism of acquiring knowledge. The burden of proof of those extraordinary statements is on you and nobody else and I won't let you shift it.

[avxo]

Ugly, your not the only one who was born a skeptic with no faith gene!

I remember being taken to "Sunday school" (although it was on a Wednesday) as a young child, around the age of 8 or 9, and thinking to myself how stupid religion was, and how obvious it was that people only believe in God because they are afraid to die.

I was a die-hard atheist for the first 20 years of my life, and I was able to argue against religious belief as good as any popular atheistic intellectual.

If your at all interested in this subject, you may be interested in Anthony Flew! He was the "Richard Dawkins" of the 20th century, one of the most famous atheists of all time!

So we're supposed to believe that after decades of reasoned and considered unbelief, you received - supernaturally one would imagine - conclusive proof of and evidence for the existence of the Christian deity?

As opposed to the more reasonable explanation that, faced with the consequences of your promiscuous lifestyle in the form an HIV positive diagnosis, you sought the very same comfort that those people at the Sunday school sought?

[tbombz]

Here's my child skeptic: Mom drug the family to some urgent service about the upcoming rapture, double feature to follow: A Distant Thunder/Thief in the Night (both on YouTube). Total mindfuck for a kid who just wants to play ball, right? Death, suffering, torture, hell, coming soon and all. Afterward, another hour or so discussing, getting saved, etc. Scariest, most depressing shit ever.

The whole night, through the sermon, the movies, our chat, I had ONE thought: Do we get a second chance?

I was so entirely convinced I COULDN'T believe, I knew I'd never make the first cut. But I figured, hell, if I actually see Jesus come down from the sky, that'll convince me, right? So maybe there's some second chance loophole? Die without the mark or whatever, I didn't know.

Point being, that's what I'd need in order to believe.

Everyone just dismissed my concerns, because, "Just believe, son, no worries," like it's that easy. 

Understood then that I couldn't simply choose to believe; learned, too, that some folks think you can, which probably explains the 'chose to be gay' mentality. Also reveals one of the flaws in Pascal's Wager.

Ugly,

I am sorry that you had a terrible experience. There are many Christians who are so zealous for the faith that they forget common human decency and proper social graces.

Now, anyone who says that a person can simply choose to believe is ignorant... The Bible says that faith is a gift from God; that it is impossible for a human being to truly believe the Gospel without supernatural revelation and regeneration.

As for the choose to be gay idea... some people do choose to be gay. Sexuality is, after all, quite fluid. But a lot of people are shaped by their genetics and by their environment to be homosexual. In fact, the Bible teaches that we are all born in sin, and that all of our innate desires are perverse. So, the idea of being born gay is actually quite biblical. We are born selfish, hateful, prideful, perverse, etc etc.

So we're supposed to believe that after decades of reasoned and considered unbelief, you received - supernaturally one would imagine - conclusive proof of and evidence for the existence of the Christian deity?

As opposed to the more reasonable explanation that, faced with the consequences of your promiscuous lifestyle in the form an HIV positive diagnosis, you sought the very same comfort that those people at the Sunday school sought?

I have considered the idea that maybe my experiences were a subconscious attempt at giving myself comfort in the face of death. However, upon examination, the idea just doesn't hold up.


AVXO, your an intelligent guy. A 'free thinker". Surely you know that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence? Why don't you open your mind to the mere possibility that maybe there is more to life than you know? Or do you think that your knowledge encompasses everything in all of reality?

[The Ugly]

Ugly,

1) I am sorry that you had a terrible experience. There are many Christians who are so zealous for the faith that they forget common human decency and proper social graces.

2) Now, anyone who says that a person can simply choose to believe is ignorant... The Bible says that faith is a gift from God; that it is impossible for a human being to truly believe the Gospel without supernatural revelation and regeneration.

3) As for the choose to be gay idea... some people do choose to be gay. Sexuality is, after all, quite fluid. But a lot of people are shaped by their genetics and by their environment to be homosexual. In fact, the Bible teaches that we are all born in sin, and that all of our innate desires are perverse. So, the idea of being born gay is actually quite biblical. We are born selfish, hateful, prideful, perverse, etc etc.

1) Well, Mom felt guilty later. She didn't really know what to expect at the time, just pressured by friends and her church. And she had no idea it messed with me so much.

2) Odd that it'd be a gift. Thought the whole idea was love/worship, not hide 'n seek. And if being worshipped is the goal, what exactly is served by making faith (belief in spite of evidence) a prerequisite? Our brains (that He designed) don't work that way; makes absolutely no sense, considering how much love/worship He misses out on by excluding otherwise loving skeptics.

3) Wasn't positing anything for debate, just addressing a commonly held belief. But I sort of agree, I guess. At least with women. Imagine most men are born one way or the other, though environment can factor in as well.

And no disrespect, but anything that follows "the Bible says/teaches" is utterly useless to me. But I do appreciate the rest.