Boxer Manny Pacquiao calls for gays to be put to death

[FuryOfFirestorm]

Trying to discuss this with you is like trying to explain the core features of a painting to someone only interested in scratching the frame to see if it's been artificially colored.

If you can't address the actual issues, well, that sort of indicates why your analogies for Genesis fail.

Genesis is about the real world, one where actions have consequences, not one where there are magic solutions to things.

Yes, actions have consequences.

Yet Adam & Eve's offspring suffer the consequences for actions they had no part of!

All God had to do was kick Adam & Eve out of Eden, kick Satan out of heaven, and let Adam & Eve's kids stay in Eden.

Instead, he lets Satan spread pain and suffering, then allows Satan to continue administering pain and suffering after we die. FOREVER.

All because one of his angels fooled a naive couple into disobeying God. That guy sure holds a grudge.

 

[Kulindahr]

If the cop pushed the fireman off the ladder or sabotaged it in some way, then yes, he should be demoted. But if the cop HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, HE SHOULDN'T BE PUNISHED! BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE UNFAIR!

How hard is that concept?

And again, I ask: Is it fair that Adam & Eve's offspring should pay for their parent's sins? YES or NO?

The question is wrong, so no matter which of your options I pick, I'd be lying to you.

If I have to use your options, then the answer is "both". They have to pay for their parents' sins just like cocaine babies and AIDS babies and genetically defective babies do. But they don't get punished for their parents' sins.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yes, actions have consequences.

Yet Adam & Eve's offspring suffer the consequences for actions they had no part of!

Of course they did -- that's the nature of existence. Recognizing it is an element of mental health.

All God had to do was kick Adam & Eve out of Eden, kick Satan out of heaven, and let Adam & Eve's kids stay in Eden.

And contaminate Eden? Great.

Would you let someone with an incurable but contagious disease work in a hospital?

Instead, he lets Satan spread pain and suffering, then allows Satan to continue administering pain and suffering after we die. FOREVER.

All because one of his angels fooled a naive couple into disobeying God. That guy sure holds a grudge.

No, all because of a wonderful gift: free will. People end up where they choose to go. I'll note here, though, that you're assuming that what is really a Greek and Persian concept of "hell" is the Christian one.

And there's no grudge involved, just natural consequences.

 

[star-warrior]

Why is the question wrong Kuli?

Is it wrong, because it challenges the supremacy of God?

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

"That's where I said Genesis is about the real world, where there are consequences to actions; it's not a fairy tale where waving a magic wand will make everything suddenly better."

Like how the Earth was overrun by the Nephilem, and God make a flood magically appear to kill them, while saving Noah?

Like how God magically sent the plagues to Egypt and parted the Red Sea to save the Jews?

Like he magically made manna fall from the sky to save his followers from starvation?

Yes, God would NEVER wave his wand to save people from suffering. NOPE.

Saving kids from crackhead parents doesn't require a magic wand. If the kids have some disease, inherited or otherwise, you cure it or treat it the best you can.

 

[star-warrior]

And contaminate Eden? Great.

Would you let someone with an incurable but contagious disease work in a hospital?

The tree of knowledge is a contagious disease in the garden of eden so eating from it must get you expelled? Is this what christianity boils down to, keep your followers ignorant?

 

[Kulindahr]

Why is the question wrong Kuli?

Is it wrong, because it challenges the supremacy of God?

No, it's logically wrong. It's closer to asking where the steering wheel is on a caterpillar than to whether water is a fluid.

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

Of course they did -- that's the nature of existence. Recognizing it is an element of mental health.



And contaminate Eden? Great.

Would you let someone with an incurable but contagious disease work in a hospital?



No, all because of a wonderful gift: free will. People end up where they choose to go. I'll note here, though, that you're assuming that what is really a Greek and Persian concept of "hell" is the Christian one.

And there's no grudge involved, just natural consequences.

Letting Adam & Eve's kids go unpunished contaminates Eden how? If God had freed them of Adam & Eve's sins in the first place, they wouldn't have any sins to contaminate Eden in the first place.

In this case, God had the power to cure the "sick kids" of their disease and let them back in the hospital.

 

[Kulindahr]

"That's where I said Genesis is about the real world, where there are consequences to actions; it's not a fairy tale where waving a magic wand will make everything suddenly better."

Like how the Earth was overrun by the Nephilem, and God make a flood magically appear to kill them, while saving Noah?

Like how God magically sent the plagues to Egypt and parted the Red Sea to save the Jews?

Like he magically made manna fall from the sky to save his followers from starvation?

Yes, God would NEVER wave his wand to save people from suffering. NOPE.

Saving kids from crackhead parents doesn't require a magic wand. If the kids have some disease, inherited or otherwise, you cure it or treat it the best you can.

Trying to discuss this with you is like trying to explain the core features of a painting to someone only interested in scratching the frame to see if it's been artificially colored.

If you can't address the actual issues, well, that sort of indicates why your analogies for Genesis fail.

Genesis is about the real world, one where actions have consequences, not one where there are magic solutions to things.

 

[ChickenGuy]

Okay, answer this question: should a cop be demoted because a fireman fell from a ladder?

The question makes no literal sense UNLIKE FuryOfFirestorm's question.

HOWEVER....

NO, if the cop had nothing to do with the fireman falling from the ladder.

YES, if the cop had something to do with the fireman falling from the ladder.

Good enough for you?

That makes as much sense as his question -- there's no answer, because the question doesn't make any sense.

The question made PERFECT sense. Stop pretending that it didn't.

You're INCAPABLE of separating the Biblical analogies and allegories out of your mind.

And you can't/won't EVEN say "Option 1, BUT...." or "Option 2, BUT...."

You so obviously CAN'T or WON'T answer the question.

So your response is to basically say "I'm not interested in dealing with the issues, so I'll claim victory".

My response is "You've not on now FOUR replies to me answered the question, despite me allowing you ALL explanations or disclaimers you wanted to it, so I'll claim victory."

 

[Kulindahr]

The tree of knowledge is a contagious disease in the garden of eden so eating from it must get you expelled? Is this what christianity boils down to, keep your followers ignorant?

Heh. No, it's about not doing something "till you're old enough". The Tree of Knowledge was always intended for man, but not till the right time.

I presume it took Satan a billion years to get Eve to finally cave and take that fruit. I also presume that if she'd told him to sod off, their march to earning that tree would have begun.

Christianity is about a beginning to setting things right.

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

So basically, Kuli is content with the concept of a being that sees everything you do, say or think, and lets you suffer forever if you don't live up to his standards. Because a 2000 year old book full of inconsistencies says so.

 

[Kulindahr]

The question makes no literal sense UNLIKE FuryOfFirestorm's question.

HOWEVER....

NO, if the cop had nothing to do with the fireman falling from the ladder.

YES, if the cop had something to do with the fireman falling from the ladder.

Good enough for you?



The question made PERFECT sense. Stop pretending that it didn't.

You're INCAPABLE of separating the Biblical analogies and allegories out of your mind.

And you can't/won't EVEN say "Option 1, BUT...." or "Option 2, BUT...."

You so obviously CAN'T or WON'T answer the question.



My response is "You've not on now FOUR replies to me answered the question, despite me allowing you ALL explanations or disclaimers you wanted to it, so I'll claim victory."

No -- you think the question makes sense, but only because you aren't interested in what the Bible really says. If I'm supposed to be telling you about the Bible, then I have to tell you that in the Bible's terms, that question was wrong; it cannot be answered in binary fashion as you want.

And you're wrong -- I've answered the question, just not the way you want. I dealt with the same sort of question from a cop once, who asked me some stupid thing and demanded a "yes" or "no", but no matter which of those I chose I would have been lying. I told him so, and he said, "Then lie". I told him I wasn't going to lie for him or anyone else, so I got hauled to jail for not cooperating with an investigation. The reality was that he wanted a certain view of things, and it was wrong -- and here, you're asking for a certain view of things... and it's wrong.


The cop illustration gets close to the reality: there is no correct answer; it has to be "yes or no". But the answer to the original question has to be "yes and no".


And if you want a better illustration of a question that can't be answered in binary fashion, ask a real mathematician if parallel lines ever meet.

 

[Kulindahr]

So basically, Kuli is content with the concept of a being that sees everything you do, say or think, and lets you suffer forever if you don't live up to his standards. Because a 2000 year old book full of inconsistencies says so.

No, basically Kuli is not content with your ignorance -- which you once again displayed.

You appear determined to absolutely avoid any kind of actual thought about what the Bible might say, instead choosing an approach far shallower even than that used by the Phelps clan or Pat Robertson. That's really sad, when you have a chance to actually learn something.

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

"No -- you think the question makes sense, but only because you aren't interested in what the Bible really says. If I'm supposed to be telling you about the Bible, then I have to tell you that in the Bible's terms, that question was wrong; it cannot be answered in binary fashion as you want."

So the answer lies in a book that has no proof of its veracity outside the insistence of the characters of the book itself.

That's like believing in Twilight because Bella said "this is all true" on page 42.

Until there is solid proof to support the Bible as the word of God, it has no bearing as evidence. Otherwise, I can say the Koran is "real", because Allah says it's true on page 70.

The only proof of the Bible is the Bible itself. I can open any math book, and have it proven correct by a completely different math book.

 

[Kulindahr]

"No -- you think the question makes sense, but only because you aren't interested in what the Bible really says. If I'm supposed to be telling you about the Bible, then I have to tell you that in the Bible's terms, that question was wrong; it cannot be answered in binary fashion as you want."

So the answer lies in a book that has no proof of its veracity outside the insistence of the characters of the book itself.

That's like believing in Twilight because Bella said "this is all true" on page 42.

Until there is solid proof to support the Bible as the word of God, it has no bearing as evidence. Otherwise, I can say the Koran is "real", because Allah says it's true on page 70.

The only proof of the Bible is the Bible itself. I can open any math book, and have it proven correct by a completely different math book.

If you really believe that, then stop believing there was a Homer, a Cicero, a Plato, or a myriad of other ancient figures we take for granted, because there is less evidence for them than for just the New Testament. When you start asserting that they are just made-up stories, I'll have cause to think you're doing something other than just fighting to have the Bible rendered meaningless.

 

[frankfrank]

No, it's logically wrong. It's closer to asking where the steering wheel is on a caterpillar than to whether water is a fluid.

The steering wheel on a Caterpillar is probably in a place similar to where it appears on John Deere tractors.

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

"If you really believe that, then stop believing there was a Homer, a Cicero, a Plato, or a myriad of other ancient figures we take for granted, because there is less evidence for them than for just the New Testament. When you start asserting that they are just made-up stories, I'll have cause to think you're doing something other than just fighting to have the Bible rendered meaningless.

"If was using them as evidence, then that would be a valid issue - but since i'm not...

Bible says: "God is real"
God says: "The Bible is real"
And the circle rolls on...

I'm not rendering the Bible meanless...you're assigning meaning to a book whose veracity has never been proven.

If I took any book and told you that it was written by a invisible entity and it is 100% true, I think you'd want actual proof of my claims, rather than accepting it as true because the book itself insists it is true.

 

[Kulindahr]

The steering wheel on a Caterpillar is probably in a place similar to where it appears on John Deere tractors.

Only you . . . .

 

[Kulindahr]

If was using them as evidence, then that would be a valid issue - but since i'm not...

Bible says: "God is real"
God says: "The Bible is real"
And the circle rolls on...

You really are a fundie, aren't you? You not only fight against seeing what the Bible really says, you pick and choose what evidence to use!