Topic: Three Words Fundamentalist Christians Can’t Say
Abracadabra's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:01 PM
So many nuggets of truth! bigsmile

"spirits once beaten now gold they afford, wisdom and truth the king and lord" drinker

"old magic carpets once damaged and torn, race thru the skies and erase the scorn" flowerforyou

"new horizons redeem once feeble minds, mankinds destiny about to unwind" :wink:

Um lov'in it. :wink:

Krimsa's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:06 PM
Three words Fundamentalist Christians are incapable of saying you ask?

"I am wrong."

laugh :wink:

Krimsa's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:08 PM
Edited by Krimsa on Thu 01/08/09 01:09 PM
Obviously, the ice would still be there whether or not we discovered it. Your argument doesn't have anything to do with proving the existence of a deity.


I think she lost her train of thought in the course of making a point of some kind. I was doing that on New Years Eve so I cant come down too hard on her. I was lit. laugh

Abracadabra's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:14 PM

Obviously, the ice would still be there whether or not we discovered it. Your argument doesn't have anything to do with proving the existence of a deity.


I think she lost her train of thought in the course of making a point of some kind. I was doing that on New Years Eve so I cant come down too hard on her. I was lit. laugh


Truly, what was that all about? laugh

The only reason we know that there is ice on Mars is because we saw it. If we went to Mars and found no ice caps then it would have never been there.

So what was the point again?

If there is no God, then there was never a God.

If there is a God, then there was always a God.

So what does that prove?

It's proves that either there is a God or there isn't a God and we still have no way of knowing. laugh

Does "Square One" sound familiar? huh

Krimsa's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:26 PM
Many fundamentalist Christians ask me questions like, “If God didn’t create the Universe, how did the Universe get here?” First, this question concludes the answer right from the start and then goes on to suggest that it is the only possible answer. Instead of using the evidence to come up with a theory, the fundamentalist has the “Truth” and then looks for evidence to support their “Truth.” Should they find evidence which contradicts their “Truth” then that evidence must be wrong because we already have the conclusion, i.e. the “Truth.”




Eljay's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:42 PM
Edited by Eljay on Thu 01/08/09 01:46 PM





For any christian - "I don't know" - is not a viable option to their certainty that God exists. The proof is in the life they live and the experiences thereof. The key word here is experience. Certainly one's world view comes into play here. I can look at a tree and know that the mere existance of it is part of the total ecological system of the functioning of the planet, and attribute that as part of an intelligent design - but to a chemical evolutionist - I cannot share this experience of certainty, for their world view is that the same tree they see is here by random chance, and has adapted itself into the eco-system through it's need to survive. Yet what we can both claim with absolute certainty is that "there's a tree". The "how" of the tree remains uncertain - unless one of us planted it - which then begs the question "how did the seed get here", and on and on it goes. There's just no means of establishing "evidence" to support the assurity with which one wishes to claim their belief that something is "the" truth - to convince another that they somehow are the only true witnessess of truth.

I don't think this is a unique attribute of christians. I believe we all share this.






When you ask a christian if there is a god they will not say I don't know they will say yes or of course even though they realy do not know, they can't know. They believe there is but they don't know there is.



Explain how it is they can't know.

Krimsa's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:53 PM
They can imagine there is one. I would not fault them for that. I can disapprove of them insisting that if you dont also imagine the exact same god that they imagine, you are bound for hell. Thats what I can certainly take issue with.

Abracadabra's photo
Thu 01/08/09 01:59 PM

Many fundamentalist Christians ask me questions like, “If God didn’t create the Universe, how did the Universe get here?” First, this question concludes the answer right from the start and then goes on to suggest that it is the only possible answer. Instead of using the evidence to come up with a theory, the fundamentalist has the “Truth” and then looks for evidence to support their “Truth.” Should they find evidence which contradicts their “Truth” then that evidence must be wrong because we already have the conclusion, i.e. the “Truth.”






The creationists don't look for facts, they look for ways to distort the facts and twist them into what often become outright lies.

They also ignore any facts that show why their conclusions can't possible be true.


Milesoftheusa's photo
Thu 01/08/09 02:01 PM
Here are an example I see alot of time to where they use wording to make you think something is fact. Without saying it.

A Ruse many have used in the last 5 decades to test us to see what our opinion or out cry will be.

Depending on how others react to this new research gives them the viable option to choose how this data will be used in thier final draft.

It is very clever deception if you will read what I am posting here.

They act as in one paragraph as suggesting this as fact.

Then in the next paragraph as a surety what is being said a lofty analitism.. Notice anal..

They will say if brought to a circular corner. A way out that always says what they want. A way to re-event the wheel that a circular technology always brings..


First Americans arrived as 2 separate migrations, according to new genetic evidence
The first people to arrive in America traveled as at least two separate groups to arrive in their new home at about the same time, according to new genetic evidence published online on January 8th in Current Biology, a Cell Press publication.

After the Last Glacial Maximum some 15,000 to 17,000 years ago, one group entered North America from Beringia following the ice-free Pacific coastline, while another traversed an open land corridor between two ice sheets to arrive directly into the region east of the Rocky Mountains. (Beringia is the landmass that connected northeast Siberia to Alaska during the last ice age.) Those first Americans later gave rise to almost all modern Native American groups of North, Central, and South America, with the important exceptions of the Na-Dene and the Eskimos-Aleuts of northern North America, the researchers said.

" Recent data based on archeological evidence and environmental records suggest that humans entered the Americas from Beringia as early as 15,000 years ago, and the dispersal occurred along the deglaciated Pacific coastline," said Antonio Torroni of Università di Pavia, Italy. "Our study now reveals a novel alternative scenario: Two almost concomitant paths of migration, both from Beringia about 15,000 to 17,000 years ago, led to the dispersal of Paleo-Indians—the first Americans."


Abracadabra's photo
Thu 01/08/09 02:06 PM

Explain how it is they can't know.


Christians worship a book as the "word of God".

But that book has been shown to be so self-contradictive and self-inconsistent that it couldn't possibly be the word of any God.

So whether or not "a God" might exist abstractly is irrelavent. What we can know is that the biblical account of God can't be true because the biblical stories are self-conflicting.

I think atheists clearly have the upper hand when it comes to proof. Especially in light of the new Inflation theories that show how the universe could indeed start from nothing without violating the known laws of physics. There's no longer a need to have a God create it all from nothing.

Eljay's photo
Thu 01/08/09 02:19 PM


Many fundamentalist Christians ask me questions like, “If God didn’t create the Universe, how did the Universe get here?” First, this question concludes the answer right from the start and then goes on to suggest that it is the only possible answer. Instead of using the evidence to come up with a theory, the fundamentalist has the “Truth” and then looks for evidence to support their “Truth.” Should they find evidence which contradicts their “Truth” then that evidence must be wrong because we already have the conclusion, i.e. the “Truth.”






The creationists don't look for facts, they look for ways to distort the facts and twist them into what often become outright lies.

They also ignore any facts that show why their conclusions can't possible be true.




Give me an example of this claim you've made - and a quote to back it up.

Eljay's photo
Thu 01/08/09 02:23 PM


Explain how it is they can't know.


Christians worship a book as the "word of God".

But that book has been shown to be so self-contradictive and self-inconsistent that it couldn't possibly be the word of any God.

So whether or not "a God" might exist abstractly is irrelavent. What we can know is that the biblical account of God can't be true because the biblical stories are self-conflicting.

I think atheists clearly have the upper hand when it comes to proof. Especially in light of the new Inflation theories that show how the universe could indeed start from nothing without violating the known laws of physics. There's no longer a need to have a God create it all from nothing.


Your post does nothing to explain how a person can't know there is a God.

And if there is any group of thinkers lacking proof to their beliefs - it's Atheists. They can do nothing to support their conjector that there is no God. Impossible to prove. Even you know that.

davidben1's photo
Thu 01/08/09 03:09 PM
Edited by davidben1 on Thu 01/08/09 03:47 PM
if anything in life is accessed to another, and self is left as immune, what do we have but glass houses of knowledge, which only establish a bottom to create and maintain a top, and this curse any learning, and teach what make learning as despised, the same as saying if one speak 2 + 2 = 5, that the student be wrong, a subversion of learning, as this could only be the insufficient skill of the teacher, as how can any leader, learn itself of more, if blame is placed, as any blame impeede any true learning, and truly only describing how and what things will create or be when put together be good learning?

how can any that teach think a student is defective, and not access at least self as half the issue?

would not this subvert all learning process, and any such teacher would actually be most the one that need greater ability?

this seems most to be the attitude of the biblical notions respoken as good knowing?

is not all learning just ADDING, not taking anything away, as WRONG steal all self confidence, and then bewilderment ensue, when nothing be inspired to learning.....

the word wrong need not even exist in any world where there is higher learning......

if one stike another, to be told such is wrong, is the greatest sin, if one belief such things as sin exist......

the showing or telling of the reaction it cause is the only true learning, and being wrong hide this most.......

how is kind and loving words called to be the only good, when jesus was written to say many things to others, even myself now in this day, find no need for, as we have all as grown up, and increased, just as was spoken, and no thinking that only good is supposed to be god, created simply embellishments of small deeds, magnified unto large proportions?

the guilt of man, created by man himself.....

is not learning just a matter of like, and dislike, as even if my girfriend is with another, then this is best for her, or she would not be attracted to it, so then something is lacking, which she has found, so her destiny has spurred her to where she can learn more, so champagne and roses be in order for the new couple, or i find like within myself to stay with her?

to access anything as wrong, leave self as naked, awaiting to become what self despised?

the whole notion of seeing all things thru a filter of either good or evil, destroy the very fabric of mankind and any unity.......

how does doctrine misplace the words of text, seeing that this be the very thing spoken to be the curse, eating of the tree of only knowing all things seen thru good and evil, as how can something be evil, as stealing, if not one would know stealing hurt self, less self was stolen from?

if there are definitons made of wise, caring, kindness, courage, understanding, compassion, then no knowing of these things as good, could have ever been had, less the opposite was experienced by self, as nothing is retained within the awarenss of anything mortal, if not actually lived out, true reality, as what can say, that has never ridden a bike, to another how to NOT ride the bike.....

it is incomplete logic, not completing it's own own circle of how knowing is made, of what is most good, and happy, and what is not.....

how doth a mind, if it is convinced itself is evil, watch and record continuously hours and hours of what self would not like done to self, and the condem a spieces, that learn all things from MIMIC, and repeating, that self is the evil one, if repeating any such things?

a mind could easy become as unstable, if there is any lacking of wisdom at all, in such a modern day where more and more data is stuffed into the mind, and it is a sheer amazement that we have the peace and left that we have.......

the mind is certainly a comparative learning tool, learning ALL from direct comparison, and the mind will tell self, what it has heard, and if the heart of a child, is not made know to them to be THEIR OWN VOICE OF REASON AND THE ONLY GOD, then how cannot such things man does not like be create more each day?

then if any words that are heard, or seen, that are purtorted to bad, are repeated, ones are told they are bad?

it is a crossfire that man is creating itself, thinking of all things as thru this good and evil type thinking......

a holier than thou type perception, that access all things as holy and not holy, and of course, self always end up the holy one?

the same as to say all things are either of god or of satan, and both these were only EVER spoken in text to be potentials within all living things, so where does the BIG satan live, where does the BIG god live....

there is none described to be so in text.....

a pretty mansion on a hill, a firery den in the center of the earth?

really........

anything that is told it is wrong, is stifled and repressed, and stumbled from seeing what was most true.........

if you hit me is it wrong?

how so, as does not this deny that i had any cause in creating it?

does not all things in motion, that touch another, affect it?

if i feel i have done nothing to warrant such behavior, then i use equal force to subdue in return, or run and hide, and not anger such firey giant again, until the time to speak, and create soltuion, but still, how does any of this need to involve some assessment of most wrong?

clearly there will always be something as less wise than self for each living thing, and always something smarter, so all things are actually smarter than each other?

equalize the mind with the heart, acompleting it with inner logic, and happiness flow as a river?

how can it not, as only the "sight of evil" be what most create unhappiness.....

THERE IS NO WRONG OR TRUE UNDERSTANDING IS SUBVERTED, AND THE NATIONS ARE STARVING ONLY FOR TRUE HIGHER LEARNING, WHICH IS FUN AND PEACEFUL........

IF AMERICA CALL ITSELF A CHRISTIAN NATION, and love it's enemies, and embrace all peoples as one, why do we not lead the world in peace and untiy, and hoist the flags of every country from the porch of the whitehouse, and clearly pronounce all others countries we respect as soverign and equal to us, and we seek to prosper unity and goodwill, and certainly we would not be distained for the blatent hypocrisy of seeing we care not about such things?

we have forsaken any true learning ever had, and the tears of the sad children that have no love inputted cry out from the streets, while the government blame it on the parents, and the parents blame it on the kids.......

if there is all as one thinking and logic, we have no choice but to destroy ourselves.........

the reaction of anything, not worhsipped as the tell of what is good and learned, create the only personification of any description of satan in text, and lucifer was only called pride, man the one's that war for good and evil, man then being the only maximum tell of any "satanic" power, and collective thought of all others as "evil" creating the only energy that assault others as demons, and collective love, and compassion, and wisdom, be the only collective energy of man as wgod that exist.......

ignorance was called as satan, and wisdom called god, and god was said to only be WITHIN, and it is only things outside self, that try to convince god and satan be somewhere else......

text clearly say inner man himself before being created mortal on earth created all things, and that this was never to be revealed until the last cycle after eighteen total cycles of earth, and that each span of each cycle is buried within the text, for the sake of mankind only being prepared and NOT IGNORANT to what would happen....

there is not truth in the universe, that could ever be collected all toegther as one giant piece of all data, if any assessment be made with some single piece by piece decision of something as true or not true, and create much lack of understanding, and create illusions of things as evil, there being no such thing, as this was primitive man that used such words, to describe what it did not yet understand........

catcher in the rye, being read thru some ideas pumped into the brain by the environment, telling one "evil" is to be done, is no different than what has been done with all other data, and this process seems must be reversed, with a greater gathering of all data as all one, of good source, as how can any mortal, stand on the top of a hill, and look back at past man learing and growing up, and call them as "wrong", as all data as understanding was just coming from greater awareness each generation aquired, and so all founded us, with pride and glory, and they become as idiots?

does not man growing up learning over and over the same principles and learning, each age appling the same principles, show all things were made possible by such past individuals?

if text was used as a scientific tool, and not used to access how was holy and not holy, good or evil, we could move on, with the true discoving of the truths that many died to preserve, as it surely does hold the keys to knowing just how to create either heaven or hell, as there is critical data needed to be compared to all scientific notions already confirmed, and any notion that come from it, that speak to create others as proposed evil, reign and live in diguise of any greater truth, that the "other half" of all things written within are said to be written on the heart of each mortal, so if something use it to subvert the perfectness of others, we speak what perpetuate only demise for others self confidence, as we all need each other as confident, to complete the pieces of the puzzle that seem to be soon unfolding, if all anceint writings from all religions are pointing to some greater awareness for mankind.....

when the glass houses built for lifting some people as high, and others as low, instead of all as equal, are brought down we can inspect all things having power and courage, and not using distain of all thing that are only common emotion and feelings......

we have all power to solve and erase any misperception of evil that exist in the world that was created, since all the data to create such thing came from data only we could have put into anything?

to create a wrong and right, when life be as trial and error, be only useless fear dictating what was wrong, making it to soon surely come to be known as "evil".......

god i hate that word.....

nothing can love, that think maybe it is evil, and this notion, if man has created it, then man must fix it, as if god be the good father, does the father come to the kingdom, and fix all the shortcomings, as what wisdom of knowing would be had?

if text say "jesus" return, then it certainly appear to be most a greater truth, just as he spoke of, that had enough wisdom of HOW to love one enemy, and enough data to know how to connect and communicate with a neighbor without accessing wrong to allow creating compromise when called for.....

if any definition of evil be established, then is not this actually creating shrines to evil, making this the thing most peered at, which seems to be more the way text spoke when saying the HARM that come from making some "image" or definition of god?

such things seem to not be shrines as unto god, as god is wisdom, within each mortal, that can solve anything, and only what cause the hiding of all love in the world...

if all of life flow only from god, and god be immortal, then how can what flow from this be as impure, text even saying god hath no part with sin, so then what human does, if all come from him, or greater self, and certainly all life that be created, must be created by something greater than itself, this seeming to show easily how ALL life would have to be immortal, AND THE ONLY REASON THIS WAS SPOKEN IN DAYS PAST, AS MANY WOULD HAVE COMMITTED SUICIDE?

the human experience only a learning time, very short, just as text say it was?

spoken in the day of the release of the whole knowing, that mans courage to do such things as suicide, would not be found, the same as to say, wish for the rocks to fall upon self, but no such thing could happen?

i certainly have felt like i wished a big pile of rocks would drown me in an instant at times, lol......

if text say god be no beginning and ending, and life flow from god, then how can life not be as no beginning and ending?

if text hold true it itself, then all life has to return to immortal, once the eye's give up their mortal sight.....

and if breath come from god, then no breath can function without first the mind thinking, so life of god start as THOUGHT, so all incoming thougt is pure, and man is the only thing that is corrupting the data with the conscious mind, then not knowing which thoughts are his own, be rationalizing, thinking, and these not the same as imcoming thought.....

text wrote once, as a man thinketh, so shall he be?

the brains of man be creating all things seen, so it seem we only need to undo false perceptions input into human brains?

how can thought be perceived to be as evil, as if one believe there own thoughts are as evil, will not such believe self is possessed as evil, so it become as so, BECAUSE THIS WAS BELIEVED?

did it not say to not believe anything false, or evil be created?

so if evil be created, something false or not the most truth, has been mistaken for truth, and if religion has had milleniums to try to create unity, by beating heads with what was only the telling of all the worlds history since a beginning, then is this not the sure proof that there is a small misperception somewhere?

seems only holy interpretations tell others how others are to not be liked, let alone loved.....

time and days of fear have been beckoned, and the time come for a reckoning, the time for setting the records straight, the time for erasing the hate.......

ps.....sorry, in a hurry and didn't proof too much.....

just ignorant ideas.....

peace

Abracadabra's photo
Thu 01/08/09 03:11 PM
Give me an example of this claim you've made - and a quote to back it up.


Sure, I'll use your following quote as an example. :wink:

"And if there is any group of thinkers lacking proof to their beliefs - it's Atheists. They can do nothing to support their conjector that there is no God. Impossible to prove. Even you know that." - Eljay


See. Here you are stating things as though they are fact, but they are not facts at all.

You say, "They (atheists) can do nothing to support their conjector that there is no God."

That's a totally untrue and misleading statement. Atheists do not claim that there is no God. All they claim is that there is no reason to believe in a God. That's a completely different concept than what you are suggesting that they claim.

Therefore there is no burden of proof on Atheists to prove that there is no God. But you are implying that there should be.

And of course, it would be impossible to prove that there is no God.

However, since this isn't what atheists are claiming, it's not even close to what they need to prove.

All they need to show is how the universe could have come into existence without a God. And Inflation theory does just that.

Inflation theory explains in terms of the laws of physics how the universe could have come into existence without violating the laws of physics.

The idea that the universe needed an initial 'cause' is an invalid idea that is not supported by science. Quantum theory (and quantum measurments) have shown us that at the quanutm level things happen without cause. And one of the things that can happen is that a process of Inflation can begin and create the universe that we see without violating any of the known laws of physics, including the laws of conservation of energy, matter, and momentum.

So it would be incorrect to say that atheists cannot support their position that no God is required to bring the universe into being.

So you have just given me a perfect example of how religious people twist everything around so that it no longer even resembles truth.

Thank you. flowerforyou


Abracadabra's photo
Thu 01/08/09 03:19 PM
DavidBen wrote:

IF AMERICA CALL ITSELF A CHRISTIAN NATION, then love it's enemies, and embrace all peoples as one, and we lead the world in peace and untiy, then why do we not have every flag in the nation hanging from the porch of the whitehouse, and all others countries told they are soverign and equal to us, and we seek to prosper unity and goodwill......


Amen DavidBen Amen! drinker

Maybe we'll get there with Obmama. bigsmile

But I must say that Christians loving their enemies is truly an oxymoron.

Owl believe that when I see it.

I ain't seen it yet.

Seamonster's photo
Thu 01/08/09 07:52 PM
Edited by Seamonster on Thu 01/08/09 08:35 PM






For any christian - "I don't know" - is not a viable option to their certainty that God exists. The proof is in the life they live and the experiences thereof. The key word here is experience. Certainly one's world view comes into play here. I can look at a tree and know that the mere existance of it is part of the total ecological system of the functioning of the planet, and attribute that as part of an intelligent design - but to a chemical evolutionist - I cannot share this experience of certainty, for their world view is that the same tree they see is here by random chance, and has adapted itself into the eco-system through it's need to survive. Yet what we can both claim with absolute certainty is that "there's a tree". The "how" of the tree remains uncertain - unless one of us planted it - which then begs the question "how did the seed get here", and on and on it goes. There's just no means of establishing "evidence" to support the assurity with which one wishes to claim their belief that something is "the" truth - to convince another that they somehow are the only true witnessess of truth.

I don't think this is a unique attribute of christians. I believe we all share this.






When you ask a christian if there is a god they will not say I don't know they will say yes or of course even though they realy do not know, they can't know. They believe there is but they don't know there is.



Explain how it is they can't know.


oh ok so you have absolute proof there is a god?
Great, show it us I would realy love to see it.
And if thats the case then yes at that point they can say they know there is a god.
So please show me your proof.

Seamonster's photo
Thu 01/08/09 07:53 PM
Edited by Seamonster on Thu 01/08/09 08:34 PM



Explain how it is they can't know.


Christians worship a book as the "word of God".

But that book has been shown to be so self-contradictive and self-inconsistent that it couldn't possibly be the word of any God.

So whether or not "a God" might exist abstractly is irrelavent. What we can know is that the biblical account of God can't be true because the biblical stories are self-conflicting.

I think atheists clearly have the upper hand when it comes to proof. Especially in light of the new Inflation theories that show how the universe could indeed start from nothing without violating the known laws of physics. There's no longer a need to have a God create it all from nothing.


Your post does nothing to explain how a person can't know there is a God.

And if there is any group of thinkers lacking proof to their beliefs - it's Atheists. They can do nothing to support their conjector that there is no God. Impossible to prove. Even you know that.


I can't prove that Thor does not exist so does that mean he does?
And Athiests do not have anything to prove because they are not the ones makeing the claim.

7z3r05's photo
Thu 01/08/09 08:11 PM

no photo
Thu 01/08/09 08:13 PM



Explain how it is they can't know.


Christians worship a book as the "word of God".

But that book has been shown to be so self-contradictive and self-inconsistent that it couldn't possibly be the word of any God.

So whether or not "a God" might exist abstractly is irrelavent. What we can know is that the biblical account of God can't be true because the biblical stories are self-conflicting.

I think atheists clearly have the upper hand when it comes to proof. Especially in light of the new Inflation theories that show how the universe could indeed start from nothing without violating the known laws of physics. There's no longer a need to have a God create it all from nothing.


Your post does nothing to explain how a person can't know there is a God.

And if there is any group of thinkers lacking proof to their beliefs - it's Atheists. They can do nothing to support their conjector that there is no God. Impossible to prove. Even you know that.
Only positive assertions require proving . . .

Krimsa's photo
Fri 01/09/09 03:46 AM
Eljay, Atheists are not in a position to have to prove anything. They make no claims other than the fact that they dont see the point in worship of a godhead. That would include any sort of mystical concept of a creator and not just the god of the bible. Its not as if they single out Christians. They do very often take the position however that people are routinely killed in the name of these world religions and they are fed up with that.