A Question of Christian Theology (1 Viewer)

[jrmccann]

... but seriously jrmccann....im waiting?

Hi Blueduck (again),

Well if you were serious and interested in my reply you always could have emailed me (as I offered). This would attest to the fact that you were serious rather than just wanting to have a go at me.

Please don't presume that I am stupid or don't understand the science, as you don't even know me. Surely a person as scientific and knowledgeable as you would realize this is not the scientific method!

In fact, did you know that the GREATEST scientific minds did not fit the pattern you prescribed .... "ones of higher intellect tend to break out of this babyish delusion"....the greatest scientists and minds of history (and even today) believed in God...Sir Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein (we could keep going!)....in fact a belief in God actually pushed their scientific discovery further!

We can always agree to disagree like adults and still appreciate each other's point of view while still being amiable with each other!

Actually, i am still waiting! I offered in my posts and said that I am able and willing to answer any question on contradictions etc. So please, email me those questions if you are willing to give me the chance to respond and give me the ear to at least hear me out!

God Bless
J

 

[jrmccann]

nothing but babble, gonna post some arguments + sources or are u jst gnna preach

Hi Tommy,

What sources would you like? For which points?

God Bless
J
P.S. Will you also ask everyonee for the same degree to proof? Eg...if people claim something is "babble" would you want them to prove that it is wrong with "arguments + sources"?

 

[Sultun]

Dear Blueduck,

Thank you for proving my initial point! My initial post was me feeling sad for the millions of blogs like this on the internet filled with people who hate religion/God/Christianity etc because they find confusing the "beliefs" (or errors as i am showing!) people preach seemingly on behalf of God.

Your example of the "holy trinity" is classic! The Trinity is not "truth"...in fact it was a man made doctrine first introduced into the Church by the Roman Emperor Constantine (Early AD 300's) from which it developed in the Niceane Creed and then the Atenasian Creed (AD 525)...history attests to this...it is not Biblical or logical as you just showed!

You and the others who posted after you (Eg Sultun) struggle with and give up on Christianity because it "has no intellectual basis" (copyright Sultun!)...but in fact how you came to this conclusion was logically testing a false doctrine and a false Christianity! So I see and appreciate why you think this way!

So, you have genuinely tried to do the right thing by testing out what people have calimed (which by the way the Bible says in a good thing and promotes! eg. 1 Thess 5v21).

If you looked up the Bible and its truths, you would find "inspiration" and logic. In fact, you can even look up the writers of the 1st century and find historical evidence that even the critics of their day could not answer the logic of those teaching the truth! (also, even Jesus had to argue with the errorists of his day and the hypocrites, and put them in their place)...

However...in fact, history also attests that more people have become Christians as a logical choice made by them as an adult than those "indoctrinated" as youths! WHY? Because the TRUTH is logical...you just have to be willing to test all of the evidence! Forensic Scientists don't hang the first person the evidence points towards until they have done a total search of all the evidence! For anyone to do otherwise is not "scientific"!


It may seem "nonsensical", but its not that I can't cope with being in a world without God, its just "unscientific" and illogical to believe that there is no God!

In fact...it requires more faith to believe that God does NOT exist than what is needed to believe that He does!

God Bless
J
jrcmccann@gmail.com

Ok; what possible piece of evidence would cause you to cease believing in god?

 

[tommykins]

Hi Tommy,

What sources would you like? For which points?

God Bless
J
P.S. Will you also ask everyonee for the same degree to proof? Eg...if people claim something is "babble" would you want them to prove that it is wrong with "arguments + sources"?

well, i don't know where you get your sources from but einstein didn't believe in your christian god.

However...in fact, history also attests that more people have become Christians as a logical choice made by them as an adult than those "indoctrinated" as youths! WHY? Because the TRUTH is logical...you just have to be willing to test all of the evidence! Forensic Scientists don't hang the first person the evidence points towards until they have done a total search of all the evidence! For anyone to do otherwise is not "scientific"!

i hope you realise that you're spewing shit out of your mouth with no sources. additionally, also saying a belief in God is logical without providing any reason as to WHY it's logical.

 

[youngminii]

Hey man, I believe in God but that's my personal choice and I find Sultan's views to be ridiculously narrow minded (assuming he isn't a troll)
If you choose to be an athiest, I can't stop you. But then going on to say christians are stupid because they believe in something? No, that's stupid.

Speaking from personal experience, most people I grew up with at various churches (I used to move around churches a lot) ended up being athiest. Maybe 10-20% of the people I've seen at church believe in God, so you can't really say all christians have been 'indoctrinated' as youths.

 

[Simon_L]

Hi Blueduck (again),
In fact, did you know that the GREATEST scientific minds did not fit the pattern you prescribed .... "ones of higher intellect tend to break out of this babyish delusion"....the greatest scientists and minds of history (and even today) believed in God...Sir Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein (we could keep going!)....in fact a belief in God actually pushed their scientific discovery further!
J

Albert Einstein was not a christian, he did not believe in a personal god. He was a non practicing jew for most of his life and later on when he spoke about god he was speaking about the impersonal spinozan concept of god. If you want to read more about Einstein's religious views heres a link: Religion of Albert Einstein: Jew, with Spinozan concept of God

Sir Isaac Newton was christian, he was a great scientist who contributed greatly. He was also incredibly eccentric and wasted alot of time on wacky shit like alchemy. You say that There belief in god "pushed there scientific discovery" well this quote shows that Newtons scientific discovery was pushed by his alchemy "It is also becoming obvious that the inspiration for Newton's laws of light and theory of gravity came from his alchemical work." (link to the whole website Isaac Newton the Alchemist.) This doesn't mean alchemy has any merit whatsoever, it just shows that it helped Newton, so by your logic this is evidence of alchemy.

I really hate it when christians use this argument, or equally as annoying is when they try and type cast atheists as being immoral by saying that Stalin and Hitler were atheists (to clear the record Hitler was NOT an atheist.)

I know you were replying to Sultun claiming that people with a high intelligence are more likley to be atheists. This has been shown to be generally true in some studies.(IQ vs. Religiosity). Then you have picked two people contributed greatly to science, who you believe are christian as evidence for christianity being accepted by extremly intelligent people, there are two major problems with this:
1. There are exceptions to the rules just as there are many stupid atheists there are many intelligent christian's
2. You are using examples of very old scientists, who if presented with todays knowledge and understanding of the world, may not have needed to believe in a god to explain the world to themselves. Granted Einstein wasn't that long ago but Newton died over 250 years ago before we learned alot of the science we know today, that could have changed his mind.

 

[jrmccann]

Hi again,

Please excuse the order of these comments...its just a few thoughts from a few people....

I never said Einstein believed in the Christian God (for Tommy)! I simply stated he believed there is God! And to answer another question, how can I support this logically/intelligently (For Sultun)...let me quote Einstein to summarise...

“I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangements of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God."

Tommy...sources go both ways. You are not being respectful of yourself or me. I am not calling what you believe “s**t”.

I am very happy for you to disagree with me, and argue with me, but please afford every person the honour of hearing them out! Because to do the opposite is actually counterproductive to your posts....you are showing yourself to be anti the very things you are asking of me...eg open mind, intelligent questioning of facts, prove what you say. To attack a person shows you can’t attack their argument.

I believe that there is a God because when I look around me I see amazing trees and animals that are wonderfully made...when I look at a BMW i appreciate all the designers engineers etc that worked to make such a car...to conclude that this car just evolved its own parts and put itself together through undersigned natural processes is illogical!

Our environment screams a vital relationship between structure and function, or when a person understands the red shift of the celestial bodies of our universe they observe an origin or beginning. When scientists observe symbiosis they see design, when you observe the common pattern of created animals you see a common stamp of a creator.

When you understand laws like the 2nd law of thermodynamics you see that the world in winding down (not up – so someone wound it up in the beginning), when you read the law of conservation of matter that it can neither be created nor destroyed you realise that matter can’t just evolve (and yes you might say it denies a “creator”...but in actual fact it demonstrates that God is outside the realm of the laws He created and does not need to be bound or explained in the petty frameworks that bind us!). And there is so much more!

Daniel’s work on Physics and Mathematics was not pushed as much from alchemy as from the Bible (For Simon). Your logic was good about alchemy, that was not my point though. It is Newton’s OWN words that tell us this. He wrote extensively on the Bible...you can get his books today. One such one is “The Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse”. In this he tells us how his science was aided through his Biblical studies...

"When I wrote my treastise about our System I had an eye upon such Principles as might work with considering men for the belief of a Deity and nothing can rejoice me more than to find it useful for that purpose." (Isaac Newton, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse)

Simon I get annoyed when people put words in my mouth, so I would not do that to you (eg Hitler). I agree that there are exceptions to the rule, which was not my point. As humans we are prone to error...that is the point! However, originally my point was to show that human interference has led many to question the Bible...when in fact they should be questioning the error prone human! It is actually very interesting to see what Hitler did believe...(I have an article on that if you want to email me I can send it to you)

The truth of the Bible, like the sacrifice of Christ, has a very logical and profound importance...and can be explained logically by common examples that we exerpience in our life! We just have to be willing to think through all the options rather than just close our mind.

God Bless
J
jrcmccann@gmail.com

 

[blueduck]

Your example of the "holy trinity" is classic! The Trinity is not "truth"...in fact it was a man made doctrine first introduced into the Church by the Roman Emperor Constantine (Early AD 300's) from which it developed in the Niceane Creed and then the Atenasian Creed (AD 525)...history attests to this...it is not Biblical or logical as you just showed!
jrcmccann@gmail.com

thankyou i learned something... i am truly shocked to find that some aspects of christianity can be ignored as they are considerd false.

so i would like to change my focus to the later part of the question that is.... how does the death of a man 2000 years ago "set me free" when i had not part in it and if i were there at the time i would not have been able to justify the cruel torchure and crucifixion of a man so that all of humanity could get a "get out of jail free" card in the game of life?

Well if you were serious and interested in my reply you always could have emailed me (as I offered). This would attest to the fact that you were serious rather than just wanting to have a go at me.

are u crying? besides my original question was not aimed specifically at u i wanted it to be open to everyone....and as an aside i did not intend to "have a go at u" i actually made an attempt to not be agressive... if that did leak out it was totally subconsicous

Actually, i am still waiting! I offered in my posts and said that I am able and willing to answer any question on contradictions etc. So please, email me those questions if you are willing to give me the chance to respond and give me the ear to at least hear me out!

why do u fear public conversations so much?

me quote Einstein to summarise...

“I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangements of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God." jrcmccann@gmail.com

einstein is simply acknowledging here that the belief of god arrises from an child's inabilty to explain the universe. i suspect that he was implying that when the child matures he will be able to read and so will beable to find a logical creator or reason based on textual evidence.

 

[Simon_L]

Daniel’s work on Physics and Mathematics was not pushed as much from alchemy as from the Bible (For Simon). Your logic was good about alchemy, that was not my point though. It is Newton’s OWN words that tell us this. He wrote extensively on the Bible...you can get his books today. One such one is “The Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse”. In this he tells us how his science was aided through his Biblical studies...

"When I wrote my treastise about our System I had an eye upon such Principles as might work with considering men for the belief of a Deity and nothing can rejoice me more than to find it useful for that purpose." (Isaac Newton, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse)

You have completly missed my point. Just because he claimed it helped him (just like alchemy) does not give god some sort of proof or validity, just because he believed something and he had great discoverys does not make it correct.

When you understand laws like the 2nd law of thermodynamics you see that the world in winding down (not up – so someone wound it up in the beginning), when you read the law of conservation of matter that it can neither be created nor destroyed you realise that matter can’t just evolve (and yes you might say it denies a “creator”...but in actual fact it demonstrates that God is outside the realm of the laws He created and does not need to be bound or explained in the petty frameworks that bind us!). And there is so much more!

What bullshit, YOU are the one who doesn't understand the second law of thermodynamics. "The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the universal law of increasing entropy, stating that the entropy of an isolated system which is not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium." This only happens in a closed system, the earth is not a closed system. Claiming that god is outside these laws is a total crock of shit and the biggest cop out you can have in argument, honestly its the most redundant argument. What evidence are you basing god being outside these laws? and don't say the bible because its a massive fallacy to quote your religious scriptures for this kind of shit because they use a circular logic.

I believe that there is a God because when I look around me I see amazing trees and animals that are wonderfully made...when I look at a BMW i appreciate all the designers engineers etc that worked to make such a car...to conclude that this car just evolved its own parts and put itself together through undersigned natural processes is illogical!

Our environment screams a vital relationship between structure and function, or when a person understands the red shift of the celestial bodies of our universe they observe an origin or beginning. When scientists observe symbiosis they see design, when you observe the common pattern of created animals you see a common stamp of a creator.

Have you ever studied the theory of evolution? (this is not a rhetorical question i really want to know), Just because something is complex and even beautiful does not mean it is designed. I mean your comparing two things that aren't related at all. A BMW is a designed manufactured product with no diffrences between products while biological life is self replicating with variations and mutations, which leads to evolution and growing into these forms you find so beautiful. Also your "our environment screams a vital relationship between structure and function" this is completly explained by evolution seeing as we evolved to suit the conditions and environment on earth. This world isn't designed for us we are designed (by natural processes) for it.

 

[jrmccann]

Hi Blueduck,

“Are you crying?”...thanks, that made me smile...I like your sense of humour. I was simply trying to keep a conversation positive, like you have!

I don’t fear public conversations (my posts should attest to that), rather it become hard sometimes answering one person when you then need to tangent off to other people at the same time...as I am prone to waffle (some might say...”bull***) it makes posts rather long!

With the “get out of jail free” aspect about Christ’s death, do you mind if I write you an answer in a few days...I am going away out of internet reach, so I will type up an analogy that I think helps and post over the weekend.

Einstein is actually admitting what many scientists don’t like to...that as humans our knowledge of science is just a drop in the ocean! He is saying that when we look at our universe we see order and complexity...like books in a library. We may not be able to explain all aspects of it (ie we may not say “that is the Christian God”) but the very arrangement is evidence of an order of some kind by a power higher than the human mind! So he concludes that he is not an atheist because this order attests to a higher power, but he is not sure what God it is! Hence, my point was that when we look at the order of the universe around us, we can at least conclude there is a higher power at work who has ordered this “library”.

God Bless
J

 

[jrmccann]

Hi Simon,

I didn’t miss your point, as I actually said I agree with your logic on that (read my post)!

I do not disagree with your definition of Entropy. Entropy does apply to a closed system, and I agree that the earth may not fit this criteria...but it was you that has limited the “universal law” to the earth...I never said that. So, the principles of the law on a universal level, as a system of “infinity” still stands...systems (universally) are winding down.

How is claiming God is outside these laws wrong? How can the object that is created say to the creator “I have no need of you”? Eg we are bound by an aspect called “time”...is something that is eternal bound by time? Impossible!
Hence those under the influence of those laws of time cannot go outside them, but something that is eternal must be! It is only a “cop out” because you can’t argue against it. It is a simple fact to acknowledge because there are aspects that even science can't answer!

It is obvious a God who created these laws put them here for our benefit...so if He made them, He can change them! If we can't change them, we are not outside of the influence of those laws...but God is!

Yes...I have studied evolution...would that help? But, just because I question it, will that mean in your mind that I never studied it or understood it? I could also (just for interest) ask you if you have studied the Bible to the same depth as I have evolution?

Evolution simply means "change". It is clear, logical and scientific that micro evolution is correct (horizontal change). But it is assumed, illogical and unscientific to believe in macro evolution (vertical change). Eg, take the study of the peppered moths! It proves the former...but not the latter!

I was comparing two things appropriately...but the only way they are not comparable is because a BWM is very simplistic compared to the complexities of creation. So, it only makes my point stronger...such perfect living machines and order requires a plan, intelligence, a design and designer, If such a simple machine like a BMW needs one. Complexity requires intelligence! Even that quote by Einstein proves that!

We are so complex that variation is actually a built in feature...like expansion joins on a bridge! You don’t design a bridge without building into it the features that allow it to adapt to the various conditions that it will be faced with! This does not provide evidence for natural processes; it provides evidence for a designer thinking through all these aspects in the design!

Mutations you say? It is scientifically proven that....

“Biologically all mutations are defective” (Dr Walter Lammerts)

“It can hardly be questioned that most mutations are deleterious. Such mutations merely increase the heterozygosity of a population but do not lead to the production of a new species” (Professor Mayr – Harvard University)

If we evolve vertically by mutations (macro evolution), why has the body “evolved” proteins that actually resist and stop mutations? Why would the body evolve a mechanism that stops its “development”?

We have damage recognition proteins and we have repair systhesis proteins! All designed to stop the body from mutating DNA during transcription and translation...why? Because mutations are not advantageous!

Surely your Evolution lecturer also mentioned that!!

God Bless
J

 

[blueduck]

“Are you crying?”...thanks, that made me smile...I like your sense of humour. I was simply trying to keep a conversation positive, like you have!

I don’t fear public conversations (my posts should attest to that), rather it become hard sometimes answering one person when you then need to tangent off to other people at the same time...as I am prone to waffle (some might say...”bull***) it makes posts rather long!

advice: one post = one answer to one person

With the “get out of jail free” aspect about Christ’s death, do you mind if I write you an answer in a few days...I am going away out of internet reach, so I will type up an analogy that I think helps and post over the weekend.

so long as u dont write an incomprehensible wall of text that is fine... i much prefer succint thoughts rather than infinite ramblings of a angry mind

faraday bless
bd

 

[jrmccann]

so long as u dont write an incomprehensible wall of text that is fine... i much prefer succint thoughts rather than infinite ramblings of a angry mind

faraday bless
bd

Hi Blueduck,

Sorry about the wall of text, but I hope that it is not in comprehensible...its just a little story, so please read, I hope it makes sense...

..........................................................................................
WHY THE SACRIFICE OF JESUS CHRIST?

A school analogy (remember all analogies are like shadows...they help you see a resemblance of the shape but can lack detail, so analogies are never “perfect”).

At school, a Principal wanted to show kindness to his Year 12 students, so he built a special “Year 12 Room” for them. However, for safety, he told them that the one rule he expected them to follow was no cooking in there, as there was a risk of fire. This protected them and the other students in the school.

One day, two students brought a frying pan into the room to cook pancakes. They reasoned away the rule because they thought that the Principal’s rule was a little “harsh” and after all it was “just a bit of fun”. As they were enjoying their food, the bell rang suddenly, they had lost track of the time! So they quickly grabbed their stuff and bolted to class. However...they forgot to turn off the pan!

Unfortunately the block was burnt down (luckily no students were hurt). The Principal was rightfully upset and furious with those two students. He summoned the two students in to tell them that they were in serious trouble. They realised that there was nothing they could do to repay the debt of rebuilding the school, there was nothing they could say or do to justify themselves in anyway.

The Principal declared to the school that these two students who broke the rules had not only damaged the school by their actions but they had caused the Year 12 room to be taken away from all! Some of the students thought this was unfair, why should the rest of the Year 12 students be “punished” (and the Year 12 students in years to come) for the actions of only two people?

The Principal said that the other students were not being punished nor were they guilty. However the actions of the two who broke the rules had such drastic consequences that these had affected everybody, as it was probably not possible to build the room again.

Had the students actually considered how the Principal must have felt? His school has been damaged, his rules broken, his authority disrespected. For the Principal to just go on as nothing happened would send a message to all the students that school rules are irrelevant, anarchy would follow and their safety compromised.

Despite being upset, the Principal wanted to rectify the situation. He called in his school captain (from Year 12), a representative of the student body (one of the students) but a special and unique student because on him the Principal had given the office to represent the school. He asked the school captain to mediate and speak to the two students and the Year 12 body to get them to see right. The Principal knew that if they both worked together they could heal the rift. The Principal would investigate what funds were available for the rebuilding of the school block.

The school captain took his job seriously and felt the Principal was right, so he called the Year 12’s together and the two who had caused the fire. He spoke to them about how they all needed to acknowledge their wrong actions, and show the Principal and the rest of the students that school rules were right, that the Principal should be respected and they deserved to be punished for what they had done. They had disobeyed his rules that were there for their benefit. The school captain wanted them all to take ownership and acknowledge right, because if they didn’t make a stand, then the school rules would not be upheld in the future and this tragedy may happen again!

After this, the school captain called the entire school together, and asked the Principal to come up on the stage. Then publically, in front of all the students, on behalf of the two students and all of Year 12 apologised and openly admitted they were wrong. The captain acknowledged that the Principal’s rules were right, and should continue to be upheld for the good of the school and students.

The school captain then, to everyone’s amazement, resigned (sacrificed) his position because they were not worthy to uphold the good name of the Principal and the school. He said openly that this was the only way to show everyone the seriousness of this situation, to show everyone how the Principal had felt when his rules were broken and school burnt down. He said that the Principal must have felt that his authority had been sacrificed. So, he wanted everyone to know, that he, the school captain, declared that the Principal’s punishment was right, true and deserving. As such, he did not deserve to be captain nor did they deserve to have a Year 12 room.

All the other students were so moved by the school captain’s actions, (and the fact that the school captain had identified himself with those who had done wrong even though he was innocent), that they all said sorry and they too believed that what the school captain said was right, the Principal and his rules should be respected!

The Principal too was moved by the declaration of the school captain and the repentance of the students that he got up and asked the students to be quiet. He told them all that they were totally forgiven of anything they had done (or of any debt) and promised to not only rebuild the Year 12 room for them from school funds, but to build a new sports stadium that all the students so desperately wanted!

He then asked the school captain to come up in front of everyone. The Principal not only gave him back his badge and captaincy but put the running of the new stadium in his capable hands. The Principal said that the school captain had deserved such respect because he was not only willing to give himself for others; he was also a true representative for all that the school stood for!

So...there is logic and power in the work of Jesus Christ!

P.S. You can see from that story how the Trinity (that you thought was illogical) would ruin the entire event! The Principal can't mediate for himself!
P.P.S What is "faraday bless"

 

[blueduck]

this is more effort than any of my damn english essays .... honestly it looks too daunting right now to read...i do appreciate the effort so ill wait till after hsc when i have a few days to get through it all...if u want a quick reply i suggest u sumerise all this into one sentence of pure logical thought...thery're my fav arguments

faraday bless
bd

p.s. faraday made heaps of discoveries and had a great impact on furthering humanity... he is one of my equilivants of your god, so by saying "faraday bless" i am paradoying your sign off of "god bless"....it kind of looses its humour when u hav to explain it but im sure fellow physicist got the joke

 

[Sultun]

Hi Blueduck,

Sorry about the wall of text, but I hope that it is not in comprehensible...its just a little story, so please read, I hope it makes sense...

..........................................................................................
WHY THE SACRIFICE OF JESUS CHRIST?

A school analogy (remember all analogies are like shadows...they help you see a resemblance of the shape but can lack detail, so analogies are never “perfect”).

At school, a Principal wanted to show kindness to his Year 12 students, so he built a special “Year 12 Room” for them. However, for safety, he told them that the one rule he expected them to follow was no cooking in there, as there was a risk of fire. This protected them and the other students in the school.

One day, two students brought a frying pan into the room to cook pancakes. They reasoned away the rule because they thought that the Principal’s rule was a little “harsh” and after all it was “just a bit of fun”. As they were enjoying their food, the bell rang suddenly, they had lost track of the time! So they quickly grabbed their stuff and bolted to class. However...they forgot to turn off the pan!

Unfortunately the block was burnt down (luckily no students were hurt). The Principal was rightfully upset and furious with those two students. He summoned the two students in to tell them that they were in serious trouble. They realised that there was nothing they could do to repay the debt of rebuilding the school, there was nothing they could say or do to justify themselves in anyway.

The Principal declared to the school that these two students who broke the rules had not only damaged the school by their actions but they had caused the Year 12 room to be taken away from all! Some of the students thought this was unfair, why should the rest of the Year 12 students be “punished” (and the Year 12 students in years to come) for the actions of only two people?

The Principal said that the other students were not being punished nor were they guilty. However the actions of the two who broke the rules had such drastic consequences that these had affected everybody, as it was probably not possible to build the room again.

Had the students actually considered how the Principal must have felt? His school has been damaged, his rules broken, his authority disrespected. For the Principal to just go on as nothing happened would send a message to all the students that school rules are irrelevant, anarchy would follow and their safety compromised.

Despite being upset, the Principal wanted to rectify the situation. He called in his school captain (from Year 12), a representative of the student body (one of the students) but a special and unique student because on him the Principal had given the office to represent the school. He asked the school captain to mediate and speak to the two students and the Year 12 body to get them to see right. The Principal knew that if they both worked together they could heal the rift. The Principal would investigate what funds were available for the rebuilding of the school block.

The school captain took his job seriously and felt the Principal was right, so he called the Year 12’s together and the two who had caused the fire. He spoke to them about how they all needed to acknowledge their wrong actions, and show the Principal and the rest of the students that school rules were right, that the Principal should be respected and they deserved to be punished for what they had done. They had disobeyed his rules that were there for their benefit. The school captain wanted them all to take ownership and acknowledge right, because if they didn’t make a stand, then the school rules would not be upheld in the future and this tragedy may happen again!

After this, the school captain called the entire school together, and asked the Principal to come up on the stage. Then publically, in front of all the students, on behalf of the two students and all of Year 12 apologised and openly admitted they were wrong. The captain acknowledged that the Principal’s rules were right, and should continue to be upheld for the good of the school and students.

The school captain then, to everyone’s amazement, resigned (sacrificed) his position because they were not worthy to uphold the good name of the Principal and the school. He said openly that this was the only way to show everyone the seriousness of this situation, to show everyone how the Principal had felt when his rules were broken and school burnt down. He said that the Principal must have felt that his authority had been sacrificed. So, he wanted everyone to know, that he, the school captain, declared that the Principal’s punishment was right, true and deserving. As such, he did not deserve to be captain nor did they deserve to have a Year 12 room.

All the other students were so moved by the school captain’s actions, (and the fact that the school captain had identified himself with those who had done wrong even though he was innocent), that they all said sorry and they too believed that what the school captain said was right, the Principal and his rules should be respected!

The Principal too was moved by the declaration of the school captain and the repentance of the students that he got up and asked the students to be quiet. He told them all that they were totally forgiven of anything they had done (or of any debt) and promised to not only rebuild the Year 12 room for them from school funds, but to build a new sports stadium that all the students so desperately wanted!

He then asked the school captain to come up in front of everyone. The Principal not only gave him back his badge and captaincy but put the running of the new stadium in his capable hands. The Principal said that the school captain had deserved such respect because he was not only willing to give himself for others; he was also a true representative for all that the school stood for!

So...there is logic and power in the work of Jesus Christ!

P.S. You can see from that story how the Trinity (that you thought was illogical) would ruin the entire event! The Principal can't mediate for himself!
P.P.S What is "faraday bless"

What a terrible analogy. You should have said the Captain died in the fire, and that every student in the school from that day forward where somehow responsible yet forgiven of their sins because someone they never met killed someone else they never met a long time before they even came to school. Furthermore you should have said that the principle was all knowing (and hence allowed the student to burn alive in the fire- a student which was not only his SON but HIMSELF- and he allowed this student to die- not allowed- he demanded that this student be burned alive as a sacrifice to himself, in order to vicariously redeem the sins of others). So the best your pathetic God can come up with; the best message he can send to all humanity is not a message at all but rather a crude, absurd and revolting human sacrifice. What a disgusting doctrine Christianity is founded upon. What revolting logic must a twisted mind like yours employ to take such a fowl notion of human sacrifice as doctrine. Nauseating.

 

[blueduck]

What a terrible analogy. You should have said the Captain died in the fire, and that every student in the school from that day forward where somehow responsible yet forgiven of their sins because someone they never met killed someone else they never met a long time before they even came to school. Furthermore you should have said that the principle was all knowing (and hence allowed the student to burn alive in the fire- a student which was not only his SON but HIMSELF- and he allowed this student to die- not allowed- he demanded that this student be burned alive as a sacrifice to himself, in order to vicariously redeem the sins of others). So the best your pathetic God can come up with; the best message he can send to all humanity is not a message at all but rather a crude, absurd and revolting human sacrifice. What a disgusting doctrine Christianity is founded upon. What revolting logic must a twisted mind like yours employ to take such a fowl notion of human sacrifice as doctrine. Nauseating.

even reading this is too daunting for me...shit im lazy...im gonna have a nap

 

[breaking]

fucking lol jezzmo

 

[jrmccann]

Hi Sultun,

Thanks for your feedback...again you proved my initial point. People will never come to appreciate God because they don't have the integrity to actually investigate what He truly says. Its easier just to think its all myth and childhood stories.

Instead, to justify their position they bring up false doctrines in order to show it to be illogical and "Nauseating". Eg you keep making reference to "his SON and Himself"...I thought my analogy and even the clear comment in the P.P.S made your rebuttal redundant! The Trinity is false!

I also made it clear that "original sin" (that I think you tried to allude to with "everyone is responsible") is also false. God holds no man guilty for another's actions! It may be our misfortune to be affected by the consequences, but it is not our crime! Eg. Is a baby born from a drug addicted mother guilty of being an drug addict? NO! The mother MAY be, but unfortunately the baby has to bear the consequences of that! (But, according to common opinion, that would be God's fault! After all, we should never be accountable for our own actions, should we? It is easier just to say that all the good things in our life are because of human intelligence and all the bad things that happen are because God is just a cruel despot).

Is it cruel for a parent to ask their child who has done something wrong to admit, acknowledge and apologize for it? Is it cruel for a judge to seek contrition? Is it absurd to apply that law towards others so that all might learn and benefit? These are all analogies of my story...and when we see these practical examples we have a choice to acknowledge right ourselves or do what many people try to do in today's age...undermine the authority of justice and seek to blame others rather than take the cop on the chin and learn from it!

Like the school captain, we could show a little integrity and seek to admit fault and heal conflicts. After all, if we took this attitude a little more we would not find ourselves in the troubles our arrogance has gotten us into...and then we wouldn't have to blame God for our failures!

Maybe if we all took a little more ownership and gave up a little of ourselves to help others we would show a true sacrificing message to make our troubled world a better place! We could stop spending so much time convincing ourselves that we are right to think that there is no God and actually see how clear the signs around us are that show us He really does exist!


God Bless
J

 

[jrmccann]

this is more effort than any of my damn english essays .... honestly it looks too daunting right now to read...i do appreciate the effort so ill wait till after hsc when i have a few days to get through it all...if u want a quick reply i suggest u sumerise all this into one sentence of pure logical thought...thery're my fav arguments

faraday bless
bd

p.s. faraday made heaps of discoveries and had a great impact on furthering humanity... he is one of my equilivants of your god, so by saying "faraday bless" i am paradoying your sign off of "god bless"....it kind of looses its humour when u hav to explain it but im sure fellow physicist got the joke

Hi,

Sorry to take up your time before your HSC...I will leave this forum so I don't detract from your studies. I hope that you go really well, and get the career you are hoping for. Its worth all the study. Knowledge is power (a cliche, but true!). True knowledge is even better!

Sorry I didn't get your physics joke, my specialty is Chemistry (so if you are doing Chemistry and want any help please feel free to ask...but if you like Faraday, then you will be up with Chemistry as well...he is electro-lysis-fying).

Thanks for the intelligent conversation...I learnt lots from you.

God (the only ) Bless
J

P.S. When you are finished, and had 3 weeks at the beach...please get around to reading it through. I did spend some time trying to make sure that it was written as an allegory, but to also shift away from "error" and show truth. It is worth investigating!

 

[schtrevey]

Haven't read the whole thread but the perception that non-believers are condemned straight to hell is false. Research it, and the fact is God accepts everyone and when everyone dies they can make their own choice whether to reciprocate or not. Look up "William Lane Craig"(theologian) on youtube which includes his famous debate against Peter Atkins(prominent for writing several popular chemistry textbooks and also a professor at Oxford).