Christianity

[Gary Childress]

No, really, really SERIOUSLY.

Considering the Fact that you are so UTTERLY USELESS in DISCOURSE WITH me, what you say here is about all you can say in response, to me. As you keep PROVING True here.

you can NOT even just answer very simple questions, let alone come even close to even attempting to refute what I say and claim here.

Hmmm. I had thought better of you, Age. Perhaps my change of heart toward you wasn't entirely merited. What is behind the mask? One wonders.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Yankee Doodle

[Age]

No, really, really SERIOUSLY.

Considering the Fact that you are so UTTERLY USELESS in DISCOURSE WITH me, what you say here is about all you can say in response, to me. As you keep PROVING True here.

you can NOT even just answer very simple questions, let alone come even close to even attempting to refute what I say and claim here.

Hmmm. I had thought better of you, Age. Perhaps my change of heart toward you wasn't entirely merited. What is behind the mask? One wonders.

PLEASE INFORM us of what you are referring to here.

you thought better of me in regards to 'what', EXACTLY?

What 'change of heart' are you referring to, EXACTLY?

What 'mask' are you referring to, EXACTLY?

you wonder 'what', EXACTLY?

"iambiguous" CLAIMS 'things', which I PROVE UNTRUE, which "iambiguous" is NOT able to counter. I also ask "iambiguous" some very simple and very straightforward CLARIFYING questions in regards to what it says and claims, but "iambiguous" has SHOWN to be INCAPABLE of just answering them. So, WHERE is some 'mask', and what is the 'mask' word in reference to, EXACTLY?

If ANY one was to LOOK BACK over "iambiguous's" responses to me, the vast majority are just, 'No, SERIOUSLY', or similar like above.

[Immanuel Can]

So, is there another video I can watch instead...

You know what you should have done. You know what you need to do.

You can do it, or not.

[Age]

So, is there another video I can watch instead...

You know what you should have done. You know what you need to do.

You can do it, or not.

In other words, NO.

"immanuel can" has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL that could back up and support its OWN BELIEF that God is a 'male gendered being/person'.

Which, REALLY, has ALWAYS BEEN VERY OBVIOUS.

[Gary Childress]

Yankee Doodle

I admit, I have issues with trusting others, but I have no contempt for them, not even you, AJ. I just wonder where all the evil that happens in this world comes from. I thought surely it couldn't be from people. I thought surely people must have compassion for each other by virtue of shared experience and capacity for suffering and the ability to recognize shared identity. Am I wrong? Of course, it's a difficult thing to reconcile with the actions of many of my own leaders--or any leader (for that matter) who signs an order to send young people to their potential deaths in order to bring about death for others.

Can you explain to me how a human being declares "war" on another? What sort of thoughts go through their head? Are power addicts anything like a coke addict who will do just about anything to keep the dopamine coming? How does one who creates war celebrate war with a clear conscience, AJ? Is there such a thing as a human being without conscience?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Age]

Yankee Doodle

I admit, I have issues with trusting others, but I have no contempt for them, not even you, AJ. I just wonder where all the evil that happens in this world comes from.

If 'this' is what you are REALLY wondering that 'it' ALL comes FROM 'you', adult human beings, BECAUSE of your LEARNED selfish AND greedy ways. Which CAUSES 'you' to be Dishonest.

The root CAUSE of ALL 'evil' IS 'dishonesty'.

The second CAUSE of ALL 'evil' IS 'child abuse', which ALL of 'you' adults have SUFFERED and ENDURED, in the days when this is being written. And,

The third CAUSE of ALL 'evil' IS 'greed', or 'the love and want of more money'.

Now, if ANY NEEDS further CLARIFICATION or ACTUAL PROOF of HOW ALL of 'this' FITS TOGETHER, perfectly, then by all means JUST ASK.

I thought surely it couldn't be from people. I thought surely people must have compassion for each other by virtue of shared experience and capacity for suffering and the ability to recognize shared identity.

They DO, or may be MORE Correctly, 'they DID'.

Am I wrong?

ALL adults have 'compassion' for SOME, AT TIMES. BUT, they ALL, also, have NO 'compassion' for SOME, AT TIMES.

Just take 'you', "gary childress", as an example for PROOF of 'this'.

Of course, it's a difficult thing to reconcile with the actions of many of my own leaders--or any leader (for that matter) who signs an order to send young people to their potential deaths in order to bring about death for others.

The words that 'you', human beings, USE, and even SAY TO "yourselves" (within your OWN heads) have FAR MORE SIGNIFICANCE than 'you' YET REALIZE.

Just take the word 'leader', which you SAID and USED here, for an example.

One is ONLY a so-called 'leader' if there ARE so-called 'followers'. So, WHY 'follow' one who sends "OTHERS" to potential DEATHS while they STAY 'safe and sound' AT HOME?

Now, SOME of you may well say 'BECAUSE LAWS ARE MADE'. Well what is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS NOW is just do NOT vote in 'those' who would do SUCH 'things'.

Those so-called "leaders" are ONLY 'in' BECAUSE 'you', people, PUT 'them' THERE.

Can you explain to me how a human being declares "war" on another?

YES.

Through GREED, and SELFISHNESS, which WAS OBTAINED, or LEARNED, through an ABUSIVE childhood, and which ONLY continues to exist through and FROM dishonesty.

That IS HOW 'you', human beings, declare war ON "others".

What sort of thoughts go through their head?

Thoughts related to ENTITLEMENT, and of being 'BETTER' than "others". Again, BOTH EXISTING ONLY BECAUSE OF and FROM 'child abuse'.

Are power addicts anything like a coke addict who will do just about anything to keep the dopamine coming?

Is 'this' one of the so-called 'rhetorical questions', which 'you', human beings, talk about and go on about?

What do you think the 'addict' word is in relation to, EXACTLY, if NOT in relation to doing what it takes to get what one BELIEVES 'it' NEEDS?

How does one who creates war celebrate war with a clear conscience, AJ? Is there such a thing as a human being without conscience?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In a sense, YES.

EVERY one of 'you' adult human beings.

That is 'conscience' is ALWAYS 'there', EXISTING WITHIN, but which is OVERRIDDEN by ATTEMPTED, and ACCEPTED, OWN "justifications" and "rationalizations".

As can be CLEARLY SEEN, SHOWN, EVIDENCED, and PROVED throughout COUNTLESS WRITINGS and SPEECHES.

[Gary Childress]

Those so-called "leaders" are ONLY 'in' BECAUSE 'you', people, PUT 'them' THERE.

Do you ever use the word "we", Age? And if not, why is that?

[Age]

Those so-called "leaders" are ONLY 'in' BECAUSE 'you', people, PUT 'them' THERE.

Do you ever use the word "we", Age?

Yes.

And if not, why is that?

Redundant.

If I used the 'we' word more often, then would you ever say you agree or disagree with what I write?

For example, 'you' asked a question above. I then supplied you with an answer to that question. So, did that answer suffice, or not?

If no, then why is that?

[Age]

Those so-called "leaders" are ONLY 'in' BECAUSE 'you', people, PUT 'them' THERE.

Do you ever use the word "we", Age? And if not, why is that?

Here you provided one quote of what I said and wrote.

Now, I have NEVER voted for ANY one, and thus have NEVER put ANY one 'in'. So, WHY would 'I' use the 'we' word in that example, which you supplied here?

[Dubious]

It occurs to me that one of the most important and defensible effects of Christian metaphysical and philosophical doctrine can be located in the conceptions of how *love* is understood.

Dubious:

Thinking it over, and referencing Christian influence, another area of verifiable and important development and evolution is in that of “conscience”. You know, shame cultures and shame ethics compared with guilt cultures and guilt ethics.

To be (merely) ashamed by what others think or say was the convention, but to internalize ethical and moral principles, to which one assented morally — that is I think a higher dimension. A conscientious man and one with a conscience is (largely) a Christian creation.

Related to conscience one should recognize responsibility as having evolved through Christian influence. Not to say that it is not a complex and fraught area (feeling or belief), still the sense of guilt changes how one becomes (or does not become) responsible.

Ok Mr Quacking duck I give you the floor.

Make it good …

Complete garbage! Conscience and its battles with the external world and how it correlates with justice and the fate of the individual has already been pretty much explored and emphasized in the ancient Greek plays, especially those of Sophocles and Euripides. What you're saying is tantamount to IC's claim that one can only be moral if one believes in the bible in spite of otherwise behaving morally!

Conscience comes with unfolding awareness and doesn't require any fucking religion to back it up, when, in fact, most of the time it's religion which preempts it.

What's really apparent to most here it seems is that you are one big piece of snot, but perhaps that's not your fault. You may not yet have realized that just because snot is usually in proximity to the brain does not mean the two are interchangeable.

[iambiguous]

Over and again: I'm not much interested in what philosophers or theologians deduced about God. Given all that is at stake on both sides of the grave, I am far, far more interested in what they can provide me in the way of substantive and substantial evidence that God does exist. Then I can jettison my grim belief that in a No God world objective morality is out of reach, that my existence is essentially meaningless and purposeless and that my death = oblivion.

That is my main interest in you here. You have managed to go beyond a leap of faith to the Christian God. You claim instead that there is evidence in those 16 or 17 YouTube videos that convinced you that He does in fact reside in Heaven.

You recommended one of them to Gary above.

I watched it myself:

Basically, what is being argued here is that, as the Christian woman says, in the absence of God, all things are permitted. That as philosophers like Camus noted, No God and human existence is essentially meaningless and absurd.

In other words [and I agree with this] if there is no God than there is no basis for objective morality. It is all merely the result of the evolution of life on Earth and "human conventions".

So, the atheist suggests that "human flourishing" ought to be the criteria. And the Christian woman then points out [rightly in my view] that if there is no God than who is to say what flourishing means? She points out how Hitler thought that his Nazi policies were what would accomplish this. And, she notes, certain philosophers have argued that using the tools of philosophy will not lead us to objective morality. And I agree with this in turn.

Then she gets to the bottom line for most Christians: "What happens after you die"?

No God, no afterlife.

She sums it all up: "If Christianity is true then each one of us is here for a reason. And life does not end at the grave. And God is the absolute standard of goodness. He knows you. He loves you. He intentionally created you. So, your life ultimately does have meaning and value and purpose."

But then the Atheist makes the point, "Well, that doesn't prove that Christianity is true".

And she agrees. She merely points out again how comforted and consoled you can be if you do believe in Christianity.

Even the Church Lady admits that what she tells the atheist isn't proof of the Christian God's existence.

So, is there another video I can watch instead that does establish this. Again, simply note the segment in the video that was most persuasive to you.

You know what you should have done. You know what you need to do.

You can do it, or not.

Now, that's entertainment!!!

Seriously, though, what you need to do is to comment on the points I raised regarding the video above. Or to explain to us why you refuse to. And, again, now that I am actually watching the videos, which one would you recommend that I watch next. Hopefully the one with the segment that was most persuasive in convincing you to jettison a leap of faith to God and to believe that He does in fact reside in Heaven.

The segment that, if henry quirk really is your friend, you will be encouraging him to watch too. Or explain to us why on Earth you would choose not to.

[Gary Childress]

Those so-called "leaders" are ONLY 'in' BECAUSE 'you', people, PUT 'them' THERE.

Do you ever use the word "we", Age? And if not, why is that?

Here you provided one quote of what I said and wrote.

Self-awareness can be a wonderful thing. At least it "was" for some of "you" adults back in the days this was written. [/sarcasm]

[Age]

Do you ever use the word "we", Age? And if not, why is that?

Here you provided one quote of what I said and wrote.

Self-awareness can be a wonderful thing. At least it "was" for some of "you" adults back in the days this was written. [/sarcasm]

What is 'it', EXACTLY, that you are 'TRYING TO' SAY and EXPRESS here?

[Gary Childress]

Here you provided one quote of what I said and wrote.

Self-awareness can be a wonderful thing. At least it "was" for some of "you" adults back in the days this was written. [/sarcasm]

What is 'it', EXACTLY, that you are 'TRYING TO' SAY and EXPRESS here?

I wish I could tell you, Age. Maybe it's something you have already discovered, or maybe it's not. I have no idea. I don't know the first thing about you. I can only go off of what I see on the forum. Enjoy!