Protestantism

» Brian Tubbs - Common Sense

In response to Common Sense posted by HeadZenCards:

You have not given us your definition of what your brain thinks "God" is.

If you have read my articles and blog entries AND my discussion posts, I believe you'll see that you're very mistaken here. I have laid out the basics of my understanding of God.

However, with respect to this SPECIFIC issue - the cosmological or first cause argument - it is not possible to jump immediately from proving a First Cause to establishing that that "First Cause" is the God of the Bible.

And I NEVER claimed, btw, that you could. I have only stated that establishing a supernatural First Cause gets you ONE step closer to the biblical God - that it is CONSISTENT with the Bible. But it doesn't get you all the way there.

There is no consistency within the story of the LORD GOD in the Bible. He is a brute. Common or good sense would tell us that his story is bad fiction.

You're mixing things up now just to confuse the issue. The morality or ethics of the supernatural First Cause are not at issue in the cosmological argument. You can't disprove a Creator by arguing that the God of the Bible did mean and nasty things. That's like saying: "George W. Bush is a bad President, therefore he doesn't exist."

Either your logic is TERRIBLY flawed or you are jumping too far ahead in our discussion. We'll get to the Bible LATER. For now, we're establishing a supernatural First Cause as the most likely explanation for the beginning of the universe.

Your first cause argument has failed. Your common sense argument has failed.

Hardly. It's only failed in that you refuse to fully confront it and instead sidestep or jump ahead of it to fling your accusations against the Bible, religion, and people of faith. If you'll stop doing that and open-mindedly confront these arguments ONE AT A TIME, I think you'll at least soften a bit. But I doubt you'll let yourself do that.

But if you could make a logical argument for the existence of the LORD GOD and his super-friends, what would be the value of your faith?

Here again, you have a distorted sense of what faith is. But you're not alone in this. Several others here make the same mistake. Faith is essentially TRUST. It's not some mythical, abstract wish. It's trust. Do I have faith that my wife loves me and won't cheat on me? Do I have faith that my paycheck will have funds behind it - that it won't bounce? Do I have faith that you'll read this with an open mind? (I don't). Faith is trust.

» pink101 - Common Sense

In response to Common Sense posted by BrianTubbs:
.
We've run up against this same kind of talk over and over again.
.
It is the failure of Christianity's religionism to provide its followers with a clear understanding of what it means to have a relationship with God.
.
I watch several Bible hucksters, Stanley, Hagee, Copeland, Kennedy, and others. Without exception each one lays down the idea that there is absolute proof out there that their understanding of God is the correct version. And, in the final analysis, they all agree that their understanding is out of the Bible. They TAKE the BIBLE to be the FOUNDATION upon which their beliefs are built. Everything is provable using the Bible.
.
Their faith is not in God; but, in the Bible.
.
And, the amazing thing is that they don't see anything wrong with that.
.
:)
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Don't even need the Bible

In response to Common Sense posted by pink101:

I can make several compelling arguments for the existence of God without even resorting to the Bible. I don't need the Bible for the First Cause argument. I don't need the Bible for the Intelligent Design argument. I don't need the Bible for the moral consciousness argument. And so forth.

You're doing what Oliver does. Either you guys are desperately trying to deflect me because you sense that the First Cause argument is irrefutable -- OR -- you're just being provocative because you enjoy doing so -- OR -- you are not understanding the words I'm typing.

I don't need the Bible to establish the reasonable, rational LIKELIHOOD of God's existence!

» pink101 - Don't even need the Bible

In response to Don't even need the Bible posted by BrianTubbs:
.
I'm not trying to deflect you--just making a statement about people putting their faith in the Bible and not in God.
.
First Cause arguments fail on the same basis as the chicken and the egg question. But, so what? Discussions about creation are all hypothetical when push comes to shove. How can we possible know the facts other than through observation. That's what the Big Bangers try to do--see it in observation claiming they do in fact see the final moments of the Big Bang.
.
But, I don't have any problems with the First Cause, the Big Bang, the colliding Dimensions. The String Theory mostly confuses me.
.
I just have a problem with people who put their faith in the Bible and claim that it is in God.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Hero is "WORM DIRT"

In response to Common Sense posted by pink101:
.
The Tillman family is suffering from the loss of their son - killed by friendly fire in Iraq - and with the military for lying to them about how he died because ...
.
get ready...
.
wait for it...
.
because...
.
THEY'RE NOT CHRISTIANS!
.
.
Please watch the video here:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/24...
"Kauzlarich, now a battalion commanding officer at Fort Riley in Kansas, further suggested the Tillman family's unhappiness with the findings of past investigations might be because of the absence of a Christian faith in their lives."
.
What theocratic idiocy!

-- posted by Migisi

» Migisi - Correction

.
My mistake: Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan, not Iraq.
.
Pat's fratricide and the military's lies described in video here:
Kevin Tillman testifies about Pat Tillman's death: "Fraud-deliberate and calculated lies."
By: John Amato
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/24...
.
Kevin's account documents several troops killed by fratricide and the military's cover ups.

-- posted by Migisi

» HeadZenCards - Common Sense

In response to Common Sense posted by BrianTubbs:

You said that if I read your articles and blog entries AND your discussion posts, you believe that I would see that you've laid out the basics of your understanding of God.

This is a very lazy answer. What are you afraid of by consolidating what you believe God is for the purpose of this thread?

And you have not proven the first cause argument. "Randomness" explains the beginning of the universe just as well as the "first cause" argument.

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» Brian Tubbs - What I believe in God

In response to Common Sense posted by HeadZenCards:

Oliver, I'm not sure what you want from me in terms of laying out my belief in God. But, fine, I'll do that for you shortly. I'm sure it won't satisfy you, but whatever.

For now, let's get back to First Cause. The First Cause argument is much more plausible and likely than the "Randomness" theory. And that's the only real standard of proof we can make, since no one (other than God) was around to observe the origin of the universe.

» HeadZenCards - What I believe in God

In response to What I believe in God posted by BrianTubbs:

But who made your idea of God? Keep going and you will find other answers.

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» pink101 - What I believe in God

In response to What I believe in God posted by HeadZenCards:
.
But who made your idea of God?
.
Now, there's a great question. I'll remember that one--for sure.
.

-- posted by pink101