If atheists get accused of taking verses out of context, how do we know fundamentalists making those accusations aren’t doing the same as well?

[BarneyFife]

we could see?

well dont miss the point
it is truly revealed in its defense tbh
defending faith as a noun just rings differently than as a verb

”red stew”
where everyone starts

I really love red stew! Lentils and millet dumplings, oh my!

 

[Wrangler]

we could see?

More nihilism. You stand in epistemological quicksand of speculation.

defending faith as a noun just rings differently than as a verb

How so?

I am defending my property.​

I am my actions.​

”red stew”
where everyone starts

This comes across as you having knowledge of something. I checked out your Facebook and found this.
Say Nothing ≠ ”red stew” where everyone starts

Your world philosophy of nihilism goes against Christ teachings who said the world will hate you for standing with him.

 

[bbyrd009]

More nihilism. You stand in epistemological quicksand of speculation

for saying that you could post Scriptures to back up your point, and we could see?

How so?

well i guess you'd really have to experience it to see, but defending a selfless action that peers do not understand just has a different feel to it than defending personal beliefs that no one else really cares about anyway, most likely even Yah

This comes across as you having knowledge of something. I checked out your Facebook and found this.
Say Nothing ≠ ”red stew” where everyone starts

thats on my FB page? hmm
dunno if i have any knowledge there or not tbh; it just makes sense to me that to become Israel, one would first have to be Esau, and then Jacob. But srsly that wasnt meant for you anyway idt

anyway, have a nice Passover
Easter to you prolly

 

[Wrangler]

for saying that you could post Scriptures to back up your point, and we could see?

Yes. You offer no acceptance criteria. You only speculate that after the evidence is presented it could meet your undefined standard.

Given your world view of not knowing anything you cannot admit an acceptance criteria to confidently conclude anything. Of course, to appear ‘open minded’ you offer something could be convincing - in theory - but in practice, you pre-emptively deem it inconclusive for one reason or another.

At best, you bravely state with extreme tentativeness what you think - while also offering all kinds of qualifiers and confessions that you could be wrong.

 

[bbyrd009]

Yes. You offer no acceptance criteria. You only speculate that after the evidence is presented it could meet your undefined standard.

well i would expect the passage to speak for itself; seems like reading all of the English translations of it usually makes it clear enough

Given your world view of not knowing anything you cannot admit an acceptance criteria to confidently conclude anything.

not sure i could have put it any better myself!
He who says that he knows anything, does not

Of course, to appear ‘open minded’ you offer something could be convincing - in theory - but in practice, you pre-emptively deem it inconclusive for one reason or another.

wadr this seems like a long way around to avoid posting a Scriptural defense of a belief

At best, you bravely state with extreme tentativeness what you think - while also offering all kinds of qualifiers and confessions that you could be wrong.

boy, i sure hope that is what i am doing at least, ya

so, not sure how this became all about me lol, seems like mostly deflection? but it doesnt appear that we are going to get much of anywhere, even if we are actually sort of having a conversation now, so i wish you the best of luck in your walk ok

 

[Wrangler]

well i would expect the passage to speak for itself

No acceptance criteria means no evidence can meet it.

 

[Wrangler]

He who says that he knows anything, does not

Yet, you know this. Nihilism.

 

[Wrangler]

wadr this seems like a long way around to avoid posting a Scriptural defense of a belief

No defense is necessary since you deny the existence of an acceptance criteria. Said differently, it is not the facts but the absence of morality that dooms the discourse, no conception of right or wrong as an abstract moral principle for the facts to meet or fail.

 

[Wrangler]

not sure how this became all about me lol,

Because you denied that a reference to a Scripture verse WOULD be determinant; only that it could be persuasive. "Could" is potential, speculative. One can speculate anything. For instance, I speculate you will not postulate a criteria that you judge wrong and wrong with absolute conviction and certainty. Everything is wishy-washy with you.

 

[bbyrd009]

No acceptance criteria means no evidence can meet it.

well, or any evidence might also meet it, with an open mind

Yet, you know this. Nihilism.

nihilism now?
not sure how nihilism came into this, as i am not nihilist
although i do of course possess knowledge about things, i think you are missing the point about saying that you know wadr
but tbh this reads like just another deflection

Because you denied that a reference to a Scripture verse WOULD be determinant; only that it could be persuasive.

i never denied the first? And i put it as "could" bc interpretations vary

but i mean, seriously?

"Could" is potential, speculative. One can speculate anything. For instance, I speculate you will not postulate a criteria that you judge wrong and wrong with absolute conviction and certainty. Everything is wishy-washy with you.

Is it? I know you cant Quote "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord," or "God requires a blood sacrifice for sins," or your supporting verse, and im not being wishy washy right now at all, am i

i postulate that God hates Christians, just like the Bible says of Esau, and if you stay under that tree you will stay dead

gotta run, happy fertility day ok

 

[Wrangler]

well, or any evidence might also meet it

Not good enough! Not nearly good enough at all.

If you cannot state what evidence you WILL accept to consider the proposition valid beyond any reasonable doubt then you are just mentally masturbating.

I could present evidence all day and all night and you might demur in accepting it as conclusive. Earlier in this thread I referred to the dynamic as moving the goal post. In your case, you are not even sure there is a goal post.

 

[Lapidem]

I could present evidence all day and all night and you might demur in accepting it as conclusive.

No you couldn't, not remotely

1. Because you don't understand what evidence is and
2. Because all you have is totally subjective hearsay

But we've been round this. You don't have the intellectual honesty to debate such things

 

[bbyrd009]

Not good enough! Not nearly good enough at all.

If you cannot state what evidence you WILL accept to consider the proposition valid beyond any reasonable doubt then you are just mentally masturbating.

I could present evidence all day and all night and you might demur in accepting it as conclusive. Earlier in this thread I referred to the dynamic as moving the goal post. In your case, you are not even sure there is a goal post.

ya, im terrible like that i guess
fortunately we are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses huh

ok, i need to not talk to you anymore, so have a good one ok

 

[bbyrd009]

No you couldn't, not remotely

1. Because you don't understand what evidence is and
2. Because all you have is totally subjective hearsay

But we've been round this. You don't have the intellectual honesty to debate such things

its like talking to a ping pong ball lol

 

[Wrangler]

No you couldn't, not remotely

1. Because you don't understand what evidence is and
2. Because all you have is totally subjective hearsay

But we've been round this. You don't have the intellectual honesty to debate such things

Sure I do. You cannot answer basic questions either wadr.

why should God care that humans suffer when that is the consequence of their choices (not followed his laws)?

 

[Lapidem]

why should God care that humans suffer when that is the consequence of their choices (not followed his laws)?

1. Because according to your false dogma he's allegedly Omni-benevolent. So he should care about all suffering no matter what we choose. Does a mother cease caring for a son or daughter because they make certain choices? Your dogma is ludicrous.

2. Because according to your false dogma he's allegedly Omnipotent so has the power to prevent any and all suffering.

 

[bbyrd009]

Sure I do

no offense but no, you dont. You are a classic case of "cut your nose off despite your face," and you would obviously rather die than make a pertinent statement or ask a pertinent question that might lead to wisdom

You cannot answer basic questions either

inferring that i cannot, yet you have not asked me any questions that i have not at least attempted to answer, now have you
i asked you to Quote a v in support of a belief, and you immediately went on the attack lol
gee, i wonder why Yah hates xtians

 

[Wrangler]

Because according to your false dogma he's allegedly Omni-benevolent.

BS. Not one verse in the Bible says God is unjust. If people don't do his Will, they deserve death - plain and simple. You are simply creating a Strawman because you got nothing to support your sick, perverted ideology.

 

[Wrangler]

2. Because according to your false dogma he's allegedly Omnipotent so has the power to prevent any and all suffering.

Agreed he has power but that is not the question. The question is why should he care about human suffering when people violate his commands and get the consequences they deserve?

 

[Wrangler]

no offense but no, you dont. You are a classic case of "cut your nose off despite your face," and you would obviously rather die than make a pertinent statement or ask a pertinent question that might lead to wisdom

inferring that i cannot, yet you have not asked me any questions that i have not at least attempted to answer, now have you
i asked you to Quote a v in support of a belief, and you immediately went on the attack lol
gee, i wonder why Yah hates xtians

Well, for the record, I was responding to our friend @Lapidem there, not you. Also, you did say you have to not talk to me anymore. So, there is that.

i asked you to Quote a v in support of a belief,

You did ask me to quote the Bible to play your game. You are perfectly capable of doing your own research wadr.

Much worse than that is your dodge when I asked if it would help if I quoted the Bible. You be all like "might be" and "could be" and such noncommittal nonsense.