God's Defense Lawyers

Originally posted by FMF
Ha ha! But you declared "the most sane post in this thread" AFTER josephw had posted ELEVEN times on this thread! Why on earth would you declare "the most sane post in this thread" before you'd read the whole thread? Poor josephw, somehow felled by the vacuum caused by the opposite of a swinging fist. 😀

Whatever you do, keep posturing. Otherwise, you'd just be boring.

Originally posted by FMF
You should have gone with Ghost of nominally agnostic Duke.
😉

I'd say that your obsession with gonads is unhealthy, but that's probably what you're looking for.

Originally posted by FMF
But your "answer" earlier was a failure/refusal to answer. The question was: Do you believe that there is eternal torture for non-believers in the afterlife?

Asking a question repeatedly until you get the answer you want is unsocial, at best. And psychotic at worst.

Originally posted by FMF
Mine is not a "fixation", but instead an intellectual and spiritual interest that belongs fairly and squarely on this discussion forum, and that interest is ...

... and that interest is simply attempting to show Christians as ridiculous and unbelievable, merely so that you can point to your own abandonment of God as somehow "right" and "reasonable".

In other words, to make yourself feel better. And yeah, that's sick.

Originally posted by vistesd
Though I still do it from time to time (almost reflexively, unfortunately), I am becoming convinced that personal history is just generally irrelevant (at best) to these threads, and that issues can better be discussed without that kind of self-reference in any way. “Just thinking out loud” . . .

To be completely fair, 'personal history;' is usually relevant in conversation (in ages past, people were expected to learn from others' mistakes and sucesses), but certain people here (probably in part because of this wonderful thing called the "anonymity of the internet" ) love to belittle others who do point at examples from their own lives to make their point. They call these anecdotes "trivial" just to make themselves feel better, and not because they are "irrelevant".

-Removed-

So when ANYone posts here, it has to be all about you?

Originally posted by FMF
When you let "the Word of God speak to you about these things" ~ by which I mean "eternal torture" ~ is He as evasive and as equivocal as you? You ask divegeester "What does God say?" What about the same question addressed to you? "What does God say [to you, josephw, about the notion of "eternal torture" for non-believers]?"

Yes, we get it that you think all these people who say "God has talked to me" are lying, and only because you yourself never felt the touch of God.

Sorry, but dumping your ice cream on the sidewalk is no reason to go on advocating that all ice cream should be abolished. So others enjoy what you cannot. Let them be, for once.

-Removed-

God forbid that anyone else use the same SOP that you and FMF use all the time. It sucks when it's on the other foot, doesn't it?

Originally posted by chaney3
There should be no doubt that in the Bible, God commits evil acts that would in human standards, require an attorney. Atheists point out these evil acts to believers, and believers come to God's defense as a lawyer would. The problem is that believers in God are dealing with a dilemma: God, should be taking a plea bargain, because He is guilty.

Without ...[text shortened]... f law for the evil He lays out on mankind in our Bible. Hitler did nothing compared to our God.

Human standards change from time to time in place to place so that many of the things
humans would accuse God of doing evil, many of us did them and felt justified at the
time. Now later others change their minds now call some actions evil, but not all do.

Some people would even accuse God of doing evil and they themselves are still doing
those things in life or in their hearts.

I'd also ask in what court will you bind God to so that He could be held accountable?

The dilemma you have is you have nothing that binds God to it as some standard He will
be held accountable to. Outside of human opinion that changes as the wind blows you
don't even have a constant standard here that people hold themselves accountable to
world wide.

If you believe you do, than maybe you should enlighten the rest of us about it.

You may get a few people of like mind to agree with you in some things, but world wide
what standard do you hold people to?

-Removed-

Yeah, another instance of asking the same question ad nauseum hoping to eventually get the answer you want.

How many times must people like you and FMF ask the same question, regardless of answer (and most times simply because you don't like the answer), anyways? Is there, in fact, any sort of upper limit at all? You both are like the little kid who incessantly asks "why?"

Joe has already answered your question a long time ago. Everything he's said since then about your "question" is simply reiterating that you didn't like his answer the first time and so he can't help your refusal to comprehend. This is clear enough to me, so what's your problem? It must be the 'not-so-hidden' agenda to make him look stupid. This is a horrible stance to take on what FMF ironically calls a "debate and discussion forum". You guys want to discuss? Then discuss. You guys want to debate? Then debate. But for the love of God, stop trying to make everyone with a different opinion than you look stupid. That's not discussion, and that's not debate. That's forum warfare, which is antisocial at its best.