Joh 7:7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that its works are evil.

I would like to respond to your comment #77. I will try to be as succinct as possible and avoid reiterating what’s already been written. If I fail to address every aspect of your comment, it is in the interest of brevity.

The portion of our conversation that most interests me is the evaluation of axiomatic suitability. In other words, who has the better axiomatic system. I made the claim that superior axioms are simple and self-evident.

The purpose of bringing up differing beliefs about divinity was not to say that all belief systems are equivalent. Indeed, you are correct, they are not. The point was that the axiom “God exists” is not simple. I see now that this was the wrong axiom to attack. You said, “I’m not doing theology sociologically, I’m doing it biblically,” which means that “God exists” is not one of your axioms, but a conclusion from a different axiom: “The Bible is true”. In response to this, I’ll refer you to the relevant section of my comment #74. Basically, it fails as an axiom because of it’s neither simple nor self-evidently true.

Note, also, that your redefinition you did, “It is not the Christian’s axiom that “God exists,” rather it is God’s axiom that “I am who I am” (Exodus 3:14),” uses the inadequate Bible presupposition. Please defend the suitability of your axioms without reference to other axioms (if a statement relies on any axiom, it is not itself an axiom, but a conclusion based on an axiom).

My claim was that science relies on only one non-mathematical axiom: inductive reasoning is valid. You tried to refute this axiom by invoking quantum mechanics, which Korgan refuted in comment #78. Are you claiming that you reject this axiom? We couldn’t even operate on a day to day basis without accepting this axiom. Please, admit that you except this axiom.

You went on to claim that science has an axiom that I omitted: “the scientific method is valid”. You said:

The scientific method cannot question itself, rather it presumes itself, its own methodology to be eternally valid, that the way things currently are is the way things have always been and always will be.

The part I emphasized illustrates the point I’m going to make. The scientific method is not an axiom, but a conclusion based on the induction axiom. You admit so yourself. The section I put in bold is a re-statement of the induction axiom. An axiom that, as I already pointed out, everyone, including yourself, considers valid.

The whole discussion about creation stories, evolution, saints, etc. are arguments about conclusions within each axiomatic system. As you pointed out in comment #72, there is no point in arguing about conclusions when the axiomatic systems are in disagreement, better to focus on the axioms.

—–

You asked me some direct questions that are not addressed in the first part of this comment. I’ll do my best to answer them here.

Nonetheless, I want you to know that I’m warped in a godly way. You? In what way are you warped?

I don’t consider myself warped in any way. Then again, if I am warped, it’s likely that I would not realize it. I leave that judgment up to others. I suspect that this question is really a subtle way to say “I’m godly, you’re not,” and was meant as an ad-hominem attack. I hope I’m wrong.

How are you prejudiced toward God?

I’m not, actually. Do you mean, “What is my theology?” I am very ignorant about the nature of God. I simply don’t know. Based on my evaluation of others’ beliefs about god(s), they don’t know either. They just think they do.

Did you not call me “ignorant of the topic”?

I don’t consider ignorance a vice, necessarily. I certainly don’t consider it an insult and as such, I didn’t mean it that way. I apologize for accidentally insulting you. I am ignorant of many topics, including quantum mechanics, classic literature, Hinduism, the history of Central America, etc. The same goes for any human. You just happen to not know much about evolution. It’s not a fault, but it certainly make any opinions you have on that topic suspect.

A final point I’d like to make is about this statement:

it is not that God is not in the so-called natural world, but that the so-called natural world is in God. They are not mutually exclusive, but rather God overlaps the so-called natural world.

This is a version of pantheism espoused by Spinoza, for one, and is not shared by most Christians. According to Christians, God is flawless and the world is flawed. Thus God cannot contain the world because that would make a portion of God flawed.

…so much for brevity :)

Luke 10:25-37 (KJV) (With emphasis added where appropriate)

25And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

29But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?

30And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.

31And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.

32And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.

33But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,

34And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.

35And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.

36Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?

37And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

I must have missed the part where the Samaritan grilled the robbed man on his faith and willingness to accept the Word before offering him help.

Also, a side note: use quotation marks when quoting someone, please. Your posts are like a puzzle to understand because you don’t.

The admin has been MIA for quite a while now. Most likely, your comments are getting caught in his spam filter. It’s pretty sensitive. If you have 2 or more links in your comment, it will get filtered. It’s frustrating, but that’s the state of affairs.

Your comment sadden me.

I’m beginning to understand why you said “this conversation will go nowhere”. You hate people. You consider every one of them vile, wicked, and murderous, among other epithets. You hold these opinions despite the contrary evidence around you continuously. If all of humanity was as horrible as you describe, society would not function and anarchy would ensue. Yet this is not our experience. Society works because most people are mostly good most of the time. Yet you harbor contempt because we are not perfect.

You ignore all the good and emphasize all the bad about people. I’m sorry that you have such a bleak and vacuous world-view. It truly is saddening. What’s worse is that you got your misanthropic point of view from Christianity. It’s very off-putting. It makes me less interested in your religion. Must one hate the world as you do to be a Christian? Thankfully I know that’s not the case.

Most people, including many Christians, see a flawed world and work to make it better. You see a flawed world and despise it and insult it. Why?

“Yes. Very hateful of him to have taken every sin of every man upon Himself on that cross, and paid the price for every one of them for all who would receive Him.”

but you also believe as a Christian that your god is the omnipotent creator of everything, and is an active and “personal” god. Can you not see the following problem with such a pairing? Your god was already responsible for all “sin”, having (according to your bible) been responsible for creating everything, and being (purportedly) omnipotent, omniscient , and omnibenevolent. Therefore, your god should get no credit for later taking on responsibility for what was already his doing and his fault. Hardly a being worth worshipping, even if it were anything other than a myth.

Such problems as the above are reason enough to reject your religion as utter nonsense, but there are many other reasons.

Korgan

Religion is a disease of the mind. Inoculate against it with reason.

I could have chosen something from Psalms that said how much I love Jesus, but that would hardly be relevant, now would it?

No, but there are plenty of other verses, particularly ones spoken by Jesus himself (and not by the great misinterpreter, Paul):

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. [Matthew 5:9]

But I tell you: Love your enemies[i] and pray for those who persecute you… If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? [Matthew 5:44, 46-47]

For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins. [Matthew 6:14-15]

Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself [Matthew 22:37-39]

None of this means a thing for those whom God has given up to vile affections. None of it. I wish you luck with all the above. I myself have never been able to get it right, and needed the blood of Jesus Christ to atone for my sins. Those who live by the law shall also die by the law. The Jews stumbled over the same stumbling stone.

As a matter of fact, a large portion of Jesus’ ministry involved serving the people that were excluded from society: the sick, the poor, women, and children. In other words, he preached tolerance for those who are different from the mainstream. So instead of using Jesus’ words of love and tolerance, you chose to quote the hate-filled words of Paul. As I said, this says more about you than it does about your god.

Jesus preached tolerance? lol He told the apostles to dust off their feet and walk away when people reject the Word. Those people whom he sat and ate with “wanted” His love.. they gave a crap about what He had to say and what He wanted from them. All of it. Not just this part and that part so as to make themselves comfortable with their own sin…

Any condemnation of any group of people that includes words and phrases like ‘vile’, ‘wicked’, ‘murderous’, and ‘worthy of death’ is hateful. To claim otherwise is simply delusional.

I see you completely skipped over the rest while i was being delusional..

Rom 3:10 as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one;
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Yes. Very hateful of him to have taken every sin of every man upon Himself on that cross, and paid the price for every one of them for all who would receive Him. Hateful. The wages of sin “is” death. Look around. See any vile? How about wickedness? Murder? Nah. People are basically good, right… pfft. Puhlease. I’m hardly the one who is delusional. Time for a self reality check. There is just as much sin in you as there is in anyone else. The difference between us all is that some have glady received Jesus Christ into their lives and are forgiven, and some that think they’re too good to need forgiveness. I don’t fit into that category. I guess you might. I don’t know.

God puts “everyone” into that category

Then your god is not not only wrong, he is not worthy of worship.

Your choice, your free will. As you wish.

That’s how sinners act, whether they portray themselves to be so much better than others or not.

I know plenty of sinners, including myself, who are not vile, wicked, murderous, and are definitely not ‘worthy of death’. It takes the worst kind of misanthropic generalization to lump all of humanity under that description.

Yes. I’m sure. Not a single vile thought word or deed in you. Spotless. No wicked thoughts words or deeds either. Run for president. We need one of those.