Zone1 Can you find the Flaw in Atheist Speaker Christopher Hitchens' Logic Here.

[alang1216]

I'm not following you. Which stories? And what did you mean by Maybe because Christians (and every other group) have been doing these things since day one?

From day one people have been guilty of murder/taking innocent life, adultery, lying, stealing, and wanting neighbors possession(s). All of which is found in the Bible.

 

[alang1216]

No, you don't. And Ian Anderson is an idiot if he believes "He who made kittens put snakes in the grass" encompasses or is representative of existence. Apparently God can't exist unless everything is perfect. That's such a dumb argument and it is most certainly is seeing God in the worst possible light. Even you have to admit that.

I think not being able to accept reality is an issue for you. Ian nailed it.

 

[alang1216]

What's your point?

Was it historical or theological?

 

[Hafar1014]

No. It's not. Not only can I choose to do evil I can choose to do evil when it isn't a lesser evil. So I can absolutely choose doing the lesser evil. You can't see this because your theology is fucked up because you think God tempts us into doing evil.

Pieces of shit won't admit to doing evil when they do evil. Honest men will.

I spent my professional life healing traumatized children and adults. I created specialized therapeutic interventions for infant trauma published them and offered free to the world. I was given the Bill Dayton Award by Temple University for work I did with wheelchair sports. Am I evil

 

[Hafar1014]

The meaning of the allegory. Dont tell me you actually believe Adam and Eve really existed. Man required Gods teaching of morals. Thats a class you flunked

 

[alang1216]

Unfortunately for you, you can't make those points when actually walking through the misconceptions Jesus corrected. If you could have, you would have.

Jesus corrected several deeply held religious and social beliefs, primarily targeting legalism, hypocritical leadership, and narrow interpretations of the law. He emphasized inner transformation over outward ritual, taught that love and mercy surpass traditional sacrifices, and declared himself the exclusive, necessary way to salvation rather than relying solely on ritual observance.

Key beliefs Jesus corrected include:

• Legalism vs. Mercy: Jesus corrected the Pharisees' strict, transactional adherence to law, emphasizing that mercy and love are more important than rigid, ritualistic obedience (e.g., healing on the Sabbath).
• The Nature of Leadership: He challenged religious leaders to stop pursuing status and, instead, embrace servant leadership grounded in humility and love, reversing the belief that leaders should be served.
• True Purity: Jesus corrected the belief that external rituals or avoiding certain people (lepers, sinners) made one clean, teaching that true defilement comes from within (the heart).
• Retribution ("Eye for an Eye"): He replaced the common, Old Testament-based understanding of strict retaliation with a radical, new standard of unconditional love, forgiveness, and non-retaliation.
• Exclusivity of Salvation: Jesus corrected the notion that salvation was attained solely by lineage or strict adherence to the Torah, teaching instead that he is the exclusive way to the Father.
• The Kingdom is Local/External: He countered the belief that the kingdom of God was a specific place or political entity to be awaited, teaching that it is "within you"—an internal, spiritual reality.
• The Purpose of Temple Sacrifice: He challenged the commercialization and exploitative nature of Temple sacrifices, signaling that his own sacrifice would fulfill and replace the entire system.

Furthermore, Jesus corrected misguided motives in his followers, such as seeking personal gain or using piety as an excuse to avoid personal responsibility.

I have no need to refute your opinions on OT law. Is "Turn the other cheek" superior to an "Eye for an Eye" or is that just your opinion?

 

[alang1216]

Does gravity punish you? When the sun goes down, are you punished by darkness? Hell is rejecting existence in the presence of God. Tell me how God has punished you. Or, if you want, tell me how he punished someone you know.

I'll get back to you when I'm dead.

 

[Hafar1014]

I have no need to refute your opinions on OT law. Is "Turn the other cheek" superior to an "Eye for an Eye" or is that just your opinion?

He never said turn the other cheek. He said slap me on the the right cheeck then turn the other cheek. That assumes a backhand slap which is how a slave is treated. The other cheek means take your best shot now because Im going to kick your ass

 

[alang1216]

Has God told you to drive out any inhabitants?

God has told me nothing.

Does doing something make it right?

I everyone does it, that makes it human.

 

[ding]

So if we're good we get to be eternally united with God. When we're bad we're eternally separated from God.

That's entirely up to God. Like I said, I don't know anyone's fate, not even my own.

Sounds like a judgement and then reward or punishment.

Or it's God's nature to give us what we ask for.

Never claimed to be anything more than human.

Actually you are claiming to be more than human, you are claiming to be a saint. Your claim is you NEVER choose to be immoral. So why don't you choose to be immoral? Which is the question you have dodged twice now. Am I to assume you say things without having a basis for saying them?

 

[ding]

From day one people have been guilty of murder/taking innocent life, adultery, lying, stealing, and wanting neighbors possession(s). All of which is found in the Bible.

Were you expecting something different? What point are you trying to make?

 

[ding]

I think not being able to accept reality is an issue for you. Ian nailed it.

Ian saw God in the worst light possible which is what you do all the time. Reality means to see the whole picture. It's you who ass ***** reality.

 

[Meriweather]

God has told me nothing.

But you know what he told others to do thousands of years ago?

 

[ding]

Was it historical or theological?

Still not following your point.

 

[ding]

I have no need to refute your opinions on OT law. Is "Turn the other cheek" superior to an "Eye for an Eye" or is that just your opinion?

That's a great question. We have free will to do either. I'm good with people following an eye for an eye as long as they don't claim what they are doing is moral because it's not. The highest standard is to turn the other cheek. There are practical reasons why turning the other cheek is the highest standard. An eye for an eye leads to predictable surprises as all normalizations of deviance are wont to do. Turning the other cheek doesn't have those surprises. But let me put it in terms you might understand, becoming what one hates is not becoming or without consequences.

Isn't it great how Christ's theology is superior to the religious misconceptions of ancient Israelites?

 

[ding]

I have no need to refute your opinions on OT law.

I'd be happy if you didn't change what I wrote to something you could attack.

Because then I wouldn't have to correct you like three times.

 

[ding]

I spent my professional life healing traumatized children and adults. I created specialized therapeutic interventions for infant trauma published them and offered free to the world. I was given the Bill Dayton Award by Temple University for work I did with wheelchair sports. Am I evil

And now you are an anti-Christian piece of shit attacking Christianity. By your logic what I just wrote would be moral because of the context of having to defend my faith from your attacks. By my logic, what I wrote was immoral. I can't even claim it was the lesser of two evils. I guess I'll just have to admit to being immoral on this specific occasion. The beauty of all of this is that God gave me free will to choose between doing good and doing evil, right? And according to your theology, it doesn't matter what I do, right? Because I'll end up in exactly the same place either way, right?

 

[Meriweather]

I'll get back to you when I'm dead.

You can also seek and find God in the here and now.

 

[alang1216]

But you know what he told others to do thousands of years ago?

Do I? I only know what was recorded, usually decades or centuries after the event. I don't always believe what people tell me today.

 

[alang1216]

That's a great question. We have free will to do either. I'm good with people following an eye for an eye as long as they don't claim what they are doing is moral because it's not. The highest standard is to turn the other cheek. There are practical reasons why turning the other cheek is the highest standard. An eye for an eye leads to predictable surprises as all normalizations of deviance are wont to do. Turning the other cheek doesn't have those surprises. But let me put it in terms you might understand, becoming what one hates is not becoming or without consequences.

So you'd choose compassion over justice? If a young child is brought to this country illegally and is discovered many years later, as an adult, you'd 'turn the over cheek' and let them stay or insist that justice says they must go?

Isn't it great how Christ's theology is superior to the religious misconceptions of ancient Israelites?

I would be great if more Christians followed his message.