A bit more of your merciful god.

[buttercup]

You're making less sense than a lot of atheists, and that's saying a lot.

This is certainly a bizarre thread, and some of the responses are so off the deep end that it’s almost comical…but very very sad at the same time.

 

[surada]

Okay, so, to recap, you're saying that Daniel was written over 150 years before the birth of Christ, but you can't explain or even want to deal with the prophecy written in it that told when Yeshua was revealed as Messiah. EVEN IF what you say is true (it's not), the prophecy is still in there and you still haven't dealt with it.

The Jews did expect anointed warrior king like David who would vanquish the enemies of the Jews. As a Christian I believe in Jesus, but their prophecy wasn't about him. He doesn't fit the prophecy. Daniel was about the persecutions under Antiochus IV ( (God Manifest) when he defiled the temple and created the first Abomination of Desolation. Does it make sense to you now?

 

[hadit]

The Jews did expect anointed warrior king like David who would vanquish the enemies of the Jews. As a Christian I believe in Jesus, but their prophecy wasn't about him. He doesn't fit the prophecy. Daniel was about the persecutions under Antiochus IV ( (God Manifest) when he defiled the temple and created the first Abomination of Desolation. Does it make sense to you now?

Daniel's prophecy pointed straight to Jesus. That's why the Magi showed up looking for the infant when they did, because almost 500 years before, Daniel told them where and when to look. He correctly identified the day Yeshua was to be revealed and nailed it. I'm sorry, but you're just going to have to deal with that reality. The prophecy is there, and Jesus is the fulfillment of that prophecy. The Jews wanted a warrior king, but God had a different plan, a plan to open the doors of access for the whole world to come to Him.

Let's say it this way. If you have someone different as the target of that prophecy, who was revealed to the world on Palm Sunday?

 

[surada]

Daniel's prophecy pointed straight to Jesus. That's why the Magi showed up looking for the infant when they did, because almost 500 years before, Daniel told them where and when to look. He correctly identified the day Yeshua was to be revealed and nailed it. I'm sorry, but you're just going to have to deal with that reality. The prophecy is there, and Jesus is the fulfillment of that prophecy. The Jews wanted a warrior king, but God had a different plan, a plan to open the doors of access for the whole world to come to Him.

Let's say it this way. If you have someone different as the target of that prophecy, who was revealed to the world on Palm Sunday?

Show me that the Magi knew 500 years in advance. Jesus was nearly 2 years old according to the story. The book of Daniel was written in 164 BC.

 

[Colin norris]

Would you also say that no one should teach children any sport or give them any education until they are adults and can choose what they want to learn?

No I would not and its foolish to think religion has the same reality as sport etc. How ignorant to compare them.

Parents teach their children. My uncle taught his child atheism, and when in elementary school, my nephew wrote about why atheism is best. The son's sentiments on atheism echoed his dad's. Should the dad never have said a word about atheism until his son was grown?

The son was born and atheist. So were you only you were infected by your stuoid parents about some silly god shit.

Before my atheist husband and I were married, he presented the idea of not exposing the children religion until they were full-grown. I responded that worked for me as long as they weren't exposed to football until they were full-grown. My husband decided there was room in their upbringing for both.

Youre a liar. Its explained above.

I take it you had a hard time growing up in a family of strong believers?

Don't assume anything about my upbringing if you're attempting to use that as a rebuttal. Next be telling me I was molested as a child and am angry.

You jesus junkies have nothing but faith and that equates to nothing. You threaten kids with hell and sins forcing them to adopt your ignorant habits. Its no different to child abuse and you should be charged for it.

 

[Colin norris]

I'm literally laughing that you think I "don't like criticism". You're the one coming unglued, getting angrier by the post.

I'm forcing you to do nothing. It's your paranoia that somewhere, someone is believing something that's going to make you do something, and it's your life's mission to stomp it out if you can. The fact that you can't apparently enrages you.

You are. First you claim you don't believe in something, then you wave a stick at it and think you're doing something. That's very silly. It's like watching a blindfolded party-goer trying to hit a pinata that's nowhere to be found.

You literally cannot prove the negative. All you can say is you are not convinced by what you've seen and heard, which is a very different thing.

What priests? I told you already I don't believe in priests. Are you so far down in your rabbit hole that you do not remember?

You most certainly DO care what EVERYONE believes, or you wouldn't be evangelizing your beliefs like the most zealous of zealots.

Oh, how terrible to teach little children that God loves them.

We absolutely have the right to do that. In fact, we do it all the time. We teach our children and you can't touch them.

It would be abuse to subject them to evangelistic atheists spewing the hatred and invective I've been seeing on here.

My Church doesn't have a child abuse problem. When we catch it, we root it out. You're talking about the Catholic Church, which is a whole different thing.

Yes.

Good luck. At least it might be mildly entertaining, because thus far you have failed in everything you've attempted. In the meanwhile, see if you can figure out why we say you are angry and bitter.

Make all the excuses you want. Both of us know I'm right so get over it.

 

[hadit]

Show me that the Magi knew 500 years in advance. Jesus was nearly 2 years old according to the story. The book of Daniel was written in 164 BC.

Of course they knew 500 years in advance because the man who wrote the prophecy was the head of the Magi and he instructed them on when Messiah was to be revealed, NOT when He was to be born. They took off for Israel when they saw His sign in the sky. Read the prophecy and do the math. There is no reason to think that Daniel was written at any time other than when it presents itself.

Again, if you think the prophecy pointed to someone else, who was it?

 

[hadit]

Make all the excuses you want. Both of us know I'm right so get over it.

You desperately want to be right, but you are not. It's just that simple, and leaves on the table the question as to why you're so angry about it and why you're so evangelical.

 

[Colin norris]

You desperately want to be right, but you are not. It's just that simple, and leaves on the table the question as to why you're so angry about it and why you're so evangelical.

Believe what you want.
Even if I were angry, which I'm not, it would not change the facts. Get over it.

 

[surada]

Of course they knew 500 years in advance because the man who wrote the prophecy was the head of the Magi and he instructed them on when Messiah was to be revealed, NOT when He was to be born. They took off for Israel when they saw His sign in the sky. Read the prophecy and do the math. There is no reason to think that Daniel was written at any time other than when it presents itself.

Again, if you think the prophecy pointed to someone else, who was it?

Well then you go on believing Daniel was written 500 years earlier. Jesus didn't fit the expected Messiah.... The temple was destroyed and the Jews were dispersed.

 

[Blues Man]

Logic itself is evidence for God. The abstract laws of logic are not man-made. They are objective, universal truths. I always chuckle when atheists bring up logic, because the atheist/materialist worldview cannot even account for logic. That puts them in a bind, they either have to deny logic itself (which is self-defeating, one must use logic in order to try to deny it) or they have to try to explain it in a way that fits with their worldview, which is impossible.

No it's not.

There is no evidence of a supernatural being in logic.

Logic is a system devised by people to evaluate the quality of their own thoughts.

 

[buttercup]

No it's not.

There is no evidence of a supernatural being in logic.

Logic is a system devised by people to evaluate the quality of their own thoughts.

You're misunderstanding. I'm talking about the actual truths of logic. They are objective truths. Objective truths are not man-made. If you think logic is subjective, then you are denying logic, which is completely absurd and self-defeating.

 

[Blues Man]

You're misunderstanding. I'm talking about the actual truths of logic. They are objective truths. Objective truths are not man-made. If you think logic is subjective, then you are denying logic, which is completely absurd and self-defeating.

Which truths are those?

 

[buttercup]

Which truths are those?

Basic logic, for example: the law of non-contradiction, the law of excluded middle, etc.

 

[Blues Man]

Basic logic, for example: the law of non-contradiction, the law of excluded middle, etc.

I don't see that as evidence of any gods.

 

[hadit]

Believe what you want.
Even if I were angry, which I'm not, it would not change the facts. Get over it.

You telling me to "Get over it" means you're not happy that others have beliefs you don't. You're an evangelical atheist who is angry at someone you claim doesn't exist, like a blindfolded child trying to hit a pinata that's not there.

 

[hadit]

Basic logic, for example: the law of non-contradiction, the law of excluded middle, etc.

There is plenty of evidence for God, for a creator, for a supernatural being. What there is not, however, is evidence the hard-core atheist will accept. Many won't even accept the evidence of their own experience. They will only accept what someone else tells them but won't accept what millions of people throughout history are telling them.

 

[buttercup]

I don't see that as evidence of any gods.

If you don't see how materialism is incompatible with absolute, transcendent meaningful truths, then you either haven't thought this through, or, I hate to say this, your mind is blind.

This thread is really beginning to show the truth of Psalm 14:1.

 

[Meriweather]

You threaten kids with hell and sins forcing them to adopt your ignorant habits. Its no different to child abuse and you should be charged for it.

I have not once threatened anyone with hell--and nor have I ever been threatened with hell. In my entire life, I have only heard three homilies that referenced hell, and not one of those homilies were a threat to anyone.

You might consider that if you grew up being threatened with hell you may, indeed, have adopted ignorant habits as no one ever properly taught you scripture. Lesson One: Love God, love your fellow man. All the following lessons are commentary on the first.

Think about it. If the people who taught you truly loved God, would they portray Him as pushing children into hell? If the people who taught you truly loved their fellow beings, would they be relating terrifying stories to children?

If this is what happened to you, it is so terrible, I cannot even imagine if it had happened to me. Or my classmates. Or my students.

I am truly sorry, Colin. It is horrifying to think of what your life must have been. It is like teaching a child to garden by whipping him with the thorns of roses.

You weren't even taught the first lesson. You were not taught love. You were taught fear.

 

[Meriweather]

he son was born and atheist. So were you only you

Not true. We are all born ignorant. That is different from being born an atheist, and you know this. Being born ignorant what then matters is what we are taught.