if god came to earth,

Originally posted by amannion
Great.
Thanks for that.
And you have some evidence for this - other than the lunatic interpretations of an old book?

Well, he did say he was coming back.

Originally posted by josephw
Well, he did say he was coming back.

Which is exactly what I meant by lunatic interpretations.

Originally posted by amannion
There's a nice analogy to this one.

The Chronology Protection Conjecture (CPC) is an argument against the possibility of time travel to the past.
It works like this:
. assume time travel to the past is possible
. at some point in the future, humans build a time machine and use it to travel back to the past
. we should see signs of such backwards time ...[text shortened]... .

I imagine someone claiming to be God might meet the same fate in our present world ...

There are alot of poor souls in asylums who think they are God, and other people they're not.

That CPC stuff sounds interesting.

Originally posted by amannion
Which is exactly what I meant by lunatic interpretations.

It's in plain english. He said he was coming the first time, and did. Why not again?

Originally posted by josephw
You're not as autonomous as you think you are. Everything you express is a paroting of views already in the world before you were born. You're a product of your environment. A robot. A puppet. An automaton. In the end your just a slave to your own physiological passions, with no hope of remedy.

But don't worry. We're all the same. The only difference betw ...[text shortened]... CONFORMED to this world: but be ye TRANSFORMED by the renewing of you mind,.." Romans 12:2

Autonomous doesn't mean "self-created", it means "self-governed". In other words, it is no threat to autonomy that the reasons I act on are reasons that others have acted on. What matters is that I do not take my reasons to have normative force simply because others have claimed that they do. This is why Christian ethics is childish; you determine what your reasons are on the basis of the proclamations of some putative authority, just like children do with their parents. Moral development requires that you find out why the reasons your parents give you are good ones, but this is impossilble for Christians without denying the very basis of Christian ethics: namely that God determines what is right and wrong.

Originally posted by josephw
It's in plain english. He said he was coming the first time, and did. Why not again?

I've got a book I read to my kids that says Santa Claus is coming again and again.
It's in plain English too.
But only an idiot would actually believe it.
I'm not calling you an idiot, but I am saying that sometimes things we read aren't meant to be literally interpreted.

Originally posted by josephw
There are alot of poor souls in asylums who think they are God, and other people they're not.

That CPC stuff sounds interesting.

It is, and of course, students love to talk about this stuff.

Originally posted by bbarr
Right, so if God decided that on Tuesdays he would torture redheads, that would be perfectly fine? He made the world, after all, so he can do whatever he pleases! Jesus, you're a dimwit.

You gotta be on some kind of hallucinogen to reason the way you do!

But you did get one thing right when you said, "He made the world, after all, so he can do whatever he pleases." But even that's not rational if you look at it another way. That is, God can do as he pleases reguardless.

Besides, you don't even believe in God. You just believe in you and in insulting those who believe in God. That's dimwitted.

Originally posted by amannion
I've got a book I read to my kids that says Santa Claus is coming again and again.
It's in plain English too.
But only an idiot would actually believe it.
I'm not calling you an idiot, but I am saying that sometimes things we read aren't meant to be literally interpreted.

I understand your point, but Jesus isn't a fairytail. For some the difference between fiction and reality is hard to define. But that isn't the case here. I think you and I can tell the difference. Believing that Jesus walked on the water is really a matter of faith. One isn't necessarily "crazy" just because he believes one way or the other.

I know some christians that are idiots. They believe things wrongly. They confuse and misinterpret the bible all the time. Even I am guilty of doing that.

I'm starting to ramble.......

Originally posted by josephw
You gotta be on some kind of hallucinogen to reason the way you do!

But you did get one thing right when you said, "He made the world, after all, so he can do whatever he pleases." But even that's not rational if you look at it another way. That is, God can do as he pleases reguardless.

Besides, you don't even believe in God. You just believe in you and in insulting those who believe in God. That's dimwitted.

Yes, I know it's hard to stomach the implications of your own absurd views. Here, I'll take it slowly so you can keep up.

You believe that God created everything.

So, you believe that it is morally permissible for God do with everything anything that he wants. This is the implication of your claim above.

So, it would be morally permissible for God to torture redheads every Tuesday.

But, it is clearly wrong to torture redheads every Tuesday.

Hence, at least one of your beliefs is false. Either you must reject that God created everything, or that it is permissible for God to whatever he wants with everything. Alternatively, of course, you could just believe contradictory claims, this seems par for the course with your ilk.

Originally posted by josephw
You gotta be on some kind of hallucinogen to reason the way you do!

But you did get one thing right when you said, "He made the world, after all, so he can do whatever he pleases." But even that's not rational if you look at it another way. That is, God can do as he pleases reguardless.

Besides, you don't even believe in God. You just believe in you and in insulting those who believe in God. That's dimwitted.

He never insults me. Well, I'll take that back. He really humiliated me in a game.

Originally posted by josephw
I understand your point, but Jesus isn't a fairytail. For some the difference between fiction and reality is hard to define. But that isn't the case here. I think you and I can tell the difference. Believing that Jesus walked on the water is really a matter of faith. One isn't necessarily "crazy" just because he believes one way or the other.

I know some ...[text shortened]... the bible all the time. Even I am guilty of doing that.

I'm starting to ramble.......

No, I completely agree.
It would be idiotic for me to call all religious people idiots - some do that here, but I find it unhelpful. (Although just between you and me, there truly are some idiots that post here.)

I don't seriously think Jesus's story is a fairytale, but I do differ in my interpretation of that story. And yes, you're right, either perspective is really a matter of faith.

Originally posted by amannion
It is, and of course, students love to talk about this stuff.

I wish some in this forum would have a better attitude, and try having some fun just bandying ideas around instead of thinking that just because someone has a faith that somehow they deserve to be considered as less than subhuman.

Originally posted by kirksey957
He never insults me. Well, I'll take that back. He really humiliated me in a game.

No, but you are more Kierkegaard than Falwell. Well, Kierkegaard tempered with Chappelle.

Originally posted by josephw
I wish some in this forum would have a better attitude, and try having some fun just bandying ideas around instead of thinking that just because someone has a faith that somehow they deserve to be considered as less than subhuman.

Do you think Bbarr has a faith?