06-15-2012, 07:43 AM
|
#1
|
New Member!
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 18
|
Stubborn Christians
Those supposed Christians are annoyingly persistent and stubborn. Arguing with them is like arguing with a wall. No matter what kind of irrefutable evidence you slap on their faces, they will always stick to their false idea of Biblical perfection. Does anyone here know any Christian who was convinced by logical arguments? I don't think so.
Logic is something they don't seem to have. They are also 100% closed minded. They are unwilling to explore new ideas or philosophies that are outside Christianity.
A few days ago, I had an argument with a supposed Christian who claims to be a missionary. He lost the argument, but still he wasn't convinced.
Dave: I believe each and every word in the Bible to be the absolute Word of God.
Wright: You claim every word in the Bible to come from God. So, what about the animal sacrifices in the Old Testament? Would a loving, kind and compassionate God really be pleased with the brutal killing of his innocent children?
Dave: Yes, God did allow animal sacrifice. It was done so that humans could be absolved of their sins. Every one of us deserves to go to hell for rebelling against God, but by offering blood sacrifice, the penalty for our sins was paid.
Wright: But, what about God being kind and compassionate? Would a compassionate God really allow the killing of innocent animals so that humans who committed horrible sins would be free?
Dave: That idea repulses me too. But, that is why Jesus came and offered himself as a sacrifice so that we no longer have to sacrifice animals to pay for our sins.
Wright: You are still missing the point. Why would a compassionate God ask for blood sacrifice to forgive sins? And, if Jesus died to replace the animals, it would mean that God was hungry for sacrifices. In other words, God indirectly killed Jesus.
Dave: God IS kind and compassionate. But, if the Bible claims that God wanted sacrifices, so it means that he DID want them.
(In other words, poor Dave failed to prove his point logically. And he was still sticking to the false idea of Biblical perfection.)
Wright: What about prophets like Isaiah and Jeremiah? They told us that God doesn’t ask for blood sacrifice? Even Jesus himself said that God wants mercy and not sacrifice. So, don’t you think the Bible is contradiction itself?
Dave: Actually, their point was that God prefers mercy over sacrifice. If someone offered animal sacrifices to God but still continued to sin, the sacrifices were meaningless. That was their point. They didn’t mean to say that animal sacrifices were never asked for.
Wright: Jeremiah 7:22 says that neither God nor Moses asked for animal sacrifices. Doesn’t it make Exodus 12 invalid?
Dave: It doesn’t. Jeremiah was saying that sacrifice was not the main point. God did ask them to offer sacrifices but the main point was having righteousness which the people didn’t have.
Wright: But Jeremiah clearly said, “I did NOT ask for sacrifices.” He never said that animal sacrifice is the “less” important point. He is saying that God NEVER asked for sacrifices. Even Jesus said, “I desire mercy, NOT sacrifice.” Psalms 40: 6 also clearly says that God does NOT want sacrifices. So, it means he never asked for blood sacrifice.
(Now, note that Dave is going to derail the topic.)
Dave: God did ask for animal sacrifice. But, we no longer need to offer sacrifices now since Jesus already paid the price for our sins.
(Even though I PROVED that God hates blood sacrifice, Dave remained unconvinced.)
Wright: Don’t you know that opposing animal sacrifice was the very reason Jesus was crucified?
... Continued in the next post...
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 07:45 AM
|
#2
|
New Member!
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 18
|
Dave: No, many scholars would disagree with you on that.
Wright: Forget what your so-called scholars say.I do have evidence.
(This evidence I gave him is listed below. You needn’t read it thoroughly if you don’t want to. After all, the conversation between me and Dave is the one you should pay attention to.)
(John 2:13-16 says- "When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the Temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords and drove all from the Temple, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said: 'Get out of here.'
Matthew's gospel does not detail the kind of animals that were being sold for slaughter, but it gives the same order of events.
"Jesus entered the Temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. 'It is written,' he said to them, 'My house will be called a house of prayer but you are making it a den of robbers.'" (Matthew21:12-13)
The same account is given in the gospel of Mark who, like Matthew, also reports that Jesus accused those at the Temple of making God's house into a "den of robbers." And there is universal acknowledgement that in both gospels, when Jesus said this, he was quoting from the prophet Jeremiah (7:11).
Now, you may have noticed that prophet Jeremiah had hurled the same accusation at the people of his own time, almost six hundred years earlier. He said it while standing at the Temple entrance, after he had already warned the people "do not shed innocent blood in this place." And when Jeremiah said God's house had been turned into a den of robbers it could not have had anything to do with moneychangers--they did not exist in his time.
In the time of Jeremiah, as in the time of Jesus, there was a great distinction made between "robbers" and "thieves." In contemporary times that distinction can best be understood by comparing the crime of petty theft with crimes of armed robbery by those who violently attack/kill their victims. But in ancient Israel there was an even greater distinction. A thief could be anyone who succumbed to a momentary impulse to steal something, but a robber was someone for whom violent crime and killing was a lifestyle.
Both Jesus and Jeremiah were indignant about the violence of sacrificial worship, not the possibility of petty theft by moneychangers. It was the violence of the system, the "robbing of life" from innocent victims in the name of God, that they were condemning. The moneychangers operating in the time of Jesus were driven out of the Temple because they were taking part in the process of sacrificial religion, not because they may have been cheating the pilgrims.
The gospel of Mark correlates Christ's attempt to dismantle the sacrificial system with the plot to kill him. Like Matthew's gospel, Mark's account of the Temple Cleansing starts by saying that Jesus "began driving out those who were buying and selling there." It goes on to relate how he explained to the people why he was doing this, by quoting Jeremiah's opposition to animal sacrifice: "My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations. But you have made it a 'den of robbers.'" And in the verse of scripture immediately following that statement, Mark reports that "The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard about this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him because the whole crowd was amazed at his teachings." (Mark 11:18).
It is ridiculous to claim that the religious leaders of Christ's time would have plotted his death because he undermined the function of the moneychangers. Nor would the crowd have been "amazed at his teachings" if Jesus was simply telling them to make sure they were not short-changed when they purchased Temple coins. What the people were amazed at was his condemnation of animal sacrifice; it had been hundreds of years since that kind of condemnation had been heard in Jerusalem. And it would not be tolerated.
A few days after he attacked the cult of animal sacrifice, Jesus was crucified. The religious leaders of his time were determined to preserve the belief that it had been ordained by God, who demanded its continuance.
That determination is echoed in the teachings of contemporary Christian leaders. In spite of Jesus, and in spite of the many biblical denunciations of animal sacrifice, people like you continue to maintain the ancient fiction that it was God who demanded His creatures be killed and butchered as an act of worship So, it defeats the whole purpose for which Jesus died.)
Dave: I am still not convinced that your version of the death of Jesus is correct.
Wright: Even though I gave you irrefutable evidence? Fine, then. So, point out why you remain unconvinced. And why exactly do you think Jesus was crucified?
(Now, instead of refuting my arguments since he can’t, let’s see what reply Dave has to give.)
Dave: I must warn you, Wright. I am a pretty busy person. I have a church to take care of, and a family to attend to. So, I don’t have time to answer all your questions. In fact, for the questions you asked, I had to spend hours doing research.
(He talks as if he is the ONLY one who has a job and a family to take care of.)
Wright: You gave me neither a proper answer nor a proper argument to any of my questions, in the first place. So, I doubt you did any “research.” Again, I am also not asking you to do any “research”, but I want you to prove your points using plain old logic.
(So, Dave failed to prove his point logically that God asked for animal sacrifice. He also failed to prove his point that Jesus died for some reason other than opposing animal sacrifice.)
Dave: … (Silence)
Wright: Fine, then. I won’t push this issue any further. But, tell me this. Even if the Bible was the Word of the God, how can you be so sure that this is the very Bible which was written years ago? Many historians say that people have falsified parts of the Bible. Many historians claim that parts of the Bible were tampered with. Many also say that wicked people inserted their own words but said that they came from God.
Dave: Historians, who say that the Bible was tampered with, do so, so that they can throw away things that they don’t like.
Wright: I disagree. They have mountains of evidence that the Bible WAS tampered with, especially in the 4th century. Also, what evidence can you give me to prove that the Bible was never tampered with?
... Continued in the next post...
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 07:45 AM
|
#3
|
New Member!
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 18
|
Dave: … (Silence)
Wright: Hello?
(He is going to derail me again.)
Dave: I understand that you are just compassionate about animals, Wright. But, the Bible is the Word of God whether you like it or not.
Wright: Sigh…
Dave: Any more questions?
Wright: When God created the world, it was perfect. There was neither killing nor any kind of violence. Everyone lived happily. And God gave humans permission to eat only plants. So, aren’t Christians supposed to be vegetarians today? Why do majority of them eat meat?
Dave: But he gave us permission to eat meat after the Flood.
Wright: Wrong. He gave only Noah permission to eat meat because all the plants were destroyed by the Flood.
Dave: But Jesus ate fish in the Gospel of Luke.
Wright: That’s because as I said before, the Bible was tampered with. Jesus was a vegetarian.
Dave: I disagree.
Wright: Fine, then. Even if Jesus did eat flesh, that was before the modern day pollution of meat. Would Jesus meat today? Our slaughterhouses are disgustingly inhumane. Check www.meat.org to know more. Do you really think that Jesus would approve of such cruelty?
Dave: I know that slaughterhouses are cruel. But, boycotting meat is not the only way to solve this problem.
Wright: So can you suggest a better way to stop this cruelty?
Dave: … (Silence)
Wright: Sigh...So, tell me. If the Bible is really precise and the absolute Word of God, how come we have four Gospels? Only one of them can be precise according to the order of events and the events that took place. All four of them describe Jesus doing different things but only one can be absolute. And, if one is absolute, it would also mean that the others are wrong. So, which one of the four Gospels is precise?
Dave: … (Silence)
Wright: Paul McCartney said that if anyone wants to save the planet, all they have to do is stop eating meat. So, as a Christian, isn’t it your duty to save the planet by going vegetarian?
Dave: The Beatles are known to say many foolish things. They also claimed to be better than Jesus.
(I doubt they said such a thing. Even if they did, would it make Paul McCartney wrong?)
Wright: Fine, then. Forget the Beatles.What about Leo Tolstoy? He said that as long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields. St. Basil said that anyone who eats meat can’t have virtue. St. Francis of Assisi called animals our brothers and sisters. Are you saying that these great people were wrong?
Dave: … (Silence)
Wright: Hello?
Dave: Wright, I thought that you wanted to have a peaceful discussion with me, but it seems that your goal is only to criticize me incessantly. I told you that I am a busy person and have a lot of things to do, and I can’t answer each and every question of yours with each and every detail. So, I must discontinue this conversation.
Wright: He, who never questions, never learns. You claim the Bible to be a “holy” book and expect others to do to the same. But, can you really expect people to accept it as “holy” without asking any questions?
Dave: The Bible is the Word of God. We have no right to question it. We should only obey. I am sorry but I don’t like your attitude. I am going to have to stop this discussion. And, even if you comment on my blog, I won’t approve your comments.
Wright: So be it.
Their hypocrisy is annoying me. I believe such people should be stoned to death.
In this way, we will get rid of this evil.
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 07:46 AM
|
#4
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Boonies
Posts: 203
|
I don't know why you waste your time with morons like that, I was bored to tears after the first few lines.
Never fear, inevitably we shall have our years of failure, and when they arrive, we must reveal tolerance and sanity. That has been the philosophy of the Rangers since the days of the gallant pioneers.
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 07:47 AM
|
#5
|
New Member!
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 18
|
I tried to knock some sense into his head. But, sadly, I think it is much better talking to a cow than talking to
A FUCKING ASSHOLE like Dave Gifford.
I hope I don't come across such idiots again.
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 09:26 AM
|
#6
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: One the armpits of the U.S. of A.
Posts: 2,856
|
Yes, I know several theists that were convinced by logical arguments.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 09:28 AM
|
#7
|
Stinkin' Mod
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 13,616
|
Quote:
Wright wrote
Dave: I believe each and every word in the Bible to be the absolute Word of God.
|
At this point you should have said "fuck off you retarded slack-jawed prick."
It would have saved you a lot of time to be put to better use watching porn.
Stop the Holy See men!
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 11:59 AM
|
#8
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9,613
|
and saved all that typing
tl;dr
“'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." Fry
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 02:45 PM
|
#9
|
Mistress Monster Mod'rator Spy
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The North Coast
Posts: 15,428
|
"I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death."
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
|
|
|
06-15-2012, 04:21 PM
|
#10
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9,613
|
yeah ditto
“'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." Fry
|
|
|
06-21-2012, 05:54 AM
|
#11
|
New Member!
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 18
|
Quote:
Smellyoldgit wrote
At this point you should have said "fuck off you retarded slack-jawed prick."
It would have saved you a lot of time to be put to better use watching porn.
|
If I would have said that I wouldn't have been able to prove anything.
I wanted to try using logic on him, but later I understood that some people just don't have the ability to think logically.
Since I had the argument, now I have proven that they have no sense of logic and are nothing but hypocrites.
|
|
|
06-21-2012, 07:37 AM
|
#12
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: One the armpits of the U.S. of A.
Posts: 2,856
|
You do realise that you did not have an argument with every single Christian (or theist), right? That was only one, and generalizing a whole group based on one person is stupid.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.
|
|
|
06-21-2012, 11:25 AM
|
#13
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9,613
|
Quote:
Wright wrote
some stuff
|
and to whom did you prove this?
“'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." Fry
|
|
|
06-21-2012, 11:25 AM
|
#14
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9,613
|
Quote:
Davin wrote
You do realise that you did not have an argument with every single Christian (or theist), right? That was only one, and generalizing a whole group based on one person is stupid.
|
are you seeing the same trend as I am Davin ?
“'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." Fry
|
|
|
06-21-2012, 02:10 PM
|
#15
|
Thank God I’m an atheist
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Little Britain
Posts: 1,076
|
If Ex ever was an atheist this is what I would imagined he was like.
"Belief means not wanting to know what is true"
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:27 PM.
|