@Divegeester

Originally posted by josephw
Logically, considering the nature of what's being discussed, one would have to be an idiot to think there would be a secular historical record valid enough to support the concept of a resurrected man, and besides, who would believe it?

Who would believe it? Inestimably more people than believe it now.

Originally posted by josephw
No such evidence is required. All the evidence needed for faith is contained in God's Word. God's Word trumps all other sources and can be trusted to be 100% accurate.

That the dissemination of a supposedly omniscient creator God's revelation could boil down to people like you, beyond parody, in your own little carefully kicked up cloud of bombast and steely earnestness, making assertions about "Truth" with a capital T, like the absolutely, completely, utterly, ever so certain Dasa himself, does little to conjure up an air of credibility and life or death import. Is your god figure really using the likes of you, talking to me the way you do, to deliver divine communication to mankind?

Originally posted by FMF
I have not claimed that your beliefs are "universally true". divegeester has not claimed that your beliefs are "universally true". Ghost of a Duke has not claimed that your beliefs are "universally true". avalanchethecat has not claimed that your beliefs are "universally true". And now you are saying that you are not claiming that your beliefs are "universally t ...[text shortened]... Christianity is "true" and that other religions are "not true" ~ is that what you're on about?

There is a difference between claiming to know your beliefs are universally true and believing your beliefs are universally true. If you believe your own beliefs are not universally true it means you are open to believing every thing, but technically you believe nothing with certainty.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
There is a difference between claiming to know your beliefs are universally true and believing your beliefs are universally true. If you believe your own beliefs are not universally true it means you are open to believing every thing, but technically you believe nothing with certainty.

You are overestimating what the significance and worth of your declarations of "certainty" ~ and what you deem "technically" this or "technically" that ~ are to me.

Originally posted by FMF
You are overestimating what the significance and worth of your declarations of "certainty" ~ and what you deem "technically" this or "technically" that ~ are to me.

Well you certainly seem to have no certainty about what you believe to be the truth, because whenever I ask you what you believe to be the truth, you always decline to answer.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Well you certainly seem to have no certainty about what you believe to be the truth, because whenever I ask you what you believe to be the truth, you always decline to answer.

Complete and utter nonsense.

Go back and give it a smiley so you can claim you were just making a self-deprecating joke.

Originally posted by josephw
What FMF "considers" is of little or no consequence.

If the Biblical record is true, then no matter how small a number Christians may be or how marginalized we are made to be, Christians are on the right path. If, as the Bible states, eternal life is a gift of God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ, His atoning death on the cross and subsequent resurrection, it matters not how few we are.

I made this point in response to your erroneous charge that FMF had suggested an opposition between christians and mankind generally. FMF's meaning had been pretty apparent and yet you had somehow misread or misinterpreted it.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"Since you are claiming that this is a universal truth,.."

You appear to be confusing me with God. That Jesus Christ is Lord isn't my claim. It's God's claim.

With that in mind perhaps we can have a real discussion. Let's be clear about who's authority it is that's making the claim first, then we can move on to a more substantive discussi ...[text shortened]... xist, then why trouble yourself having a discussion with someone who is obviously delusional? 😕[/b]

You may rest assured that have never confused you with your god. I would also point out that your god has never claimed anything, but you have a bit of blind spot relating to the stories of your crazy scripture so, well, never mind.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat to josephw
I made this point in response to your erroneous charge that FMF had suggested an opposition between christians and mankind generally. FMF's meaning had been pretty apparent and yet you had somehow misread or misinterpreted it.

Orwell would have seen it as quite deliberate and dubbed it josephwdiscourse . 😉

Originally posted by FMF
Complete and utter nonsense.

Go back and give it a smiley so you can claim you were just making a self-deprecating joke.

Since you believe 'Christianity is not the truth', what then do you believe to be 'the truth'?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Since you believe 'Christianity is not the truth', what then do you believe to be 'the truth'?

I have no superstitious notions with which I seek to replace or trump yours. Stick with your own imaginings. In so far as Christianity might be said to give people feelings of consolation, meaning, purpose etc. then it can be said to be "true". You stick with it. I have told you in detail about what underpins my non-Christian life and what sources I draw upon several times. I don’t plan to repeat it at your behest now.

Originally posted by FMF
I have no superstitious notions with which I seek to replace or trump yours. Stick with your own imaginings. In so far as Christianity might be said to give people feelings of consolation, meaning, purpose etc. then it can be said to be "true". You stick with it. I have told you in detail about what underpins my non-Christian life and what sources I draw upon several times. I don’t plan to repeat it at your behest now.

What I don't understand is this: Why are you happy for me to believe in something that you are convinced is false? Surely if your beliefs are true and mine are false you would be happy to share your beliefs with me so that I may be just as 'enlightened' as you are.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk

Why are you happy for me to believe in something that you are convinced is false?

You have already asked me about this repeatedly. I have answered, several times. But you ignored what I said. And you're ignoring it again now.

Surely if your beliefs are true and mine are false you would be happy to share your beliefs with me so that I may be just as 'enlightened' as you are.

I have shared my beliefs, repeatedly. However, you just ignored it when I talked to you about them. Even now, you're just glibly asking a question about the same thing again even though you showed no interest in my answers the previous times you asked about it..

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
What I don't understand is this: Why are you happy for me to believe in something that you are convinced is false? Surely if your beliefs are true and mine are false you would be happy to share your beliefs with me so that I may be just as 'enlightened' as you are.

Personally, I don't begrudge anyone their faith, even if I view such faith as grounded in falsehood. Clearly you are getting something out of it that makes the scary world a little less scary.

For me though, I'd rather have no answer than the wrong answer

Originally posted by FMF
That the dissemination of a supposedly omniscient creator God's revelation could boil down to people like you, beyond parody, in your own little carefully kicked up cloud of bombast and steely earnestness, making assertions about "Truth" with a capital T, like the absolutely, completely, utterly, ever so certain Dasa himself, does little to conjure up an ...[text shortened]... sing the likes of you, talking to me the way you do, to deliver divine communication to mankind?

"...people like you..." "...the likes of you..." ".., talking to me the way you do,.."

I ain't nicer than Jesus, Mr. arrogant, and I don't need your approval.

Originally posted by josephw
No such evidence is required. All the evidence needed for faith is contained in God's Word. God's Word trumps all other sources and can be trusted to be 100% accurate.

To the above you reply with thinly veiled contempt. Your hatred of God is duly noted. I tried to make a point, but as usual you run and hide behind your own personal high esteem and disregard a simple concept through obfuscation, again. The "FMF figure" strikes again.

If you don't like what I have to say about Jesus and the Bible you're free to not reply.