Total Posts:172|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

love christian hypocricy

izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.

Funny stuff.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:31:08 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

this thread is a place to post such funny hypocrisy.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 8:15:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.

Your excuse is missing the point and intellectually dishonest. Either we should treat these kids for cancer or we should not. If we should I fail to see how god should have a lower standard then we do to live up to. Your excuse fails and epicly so, at avoiding the problem that in one instance you think we should find a cure and in the other instance you fuckin turn the god brain on and say, nope shouldn't be stopped they deserve it. Should there be a cure for cancer or not?
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 8:18:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 8:15:29 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.

Your excuse is missing the point and intellectually dishonest. Either we should treat these kids for cancer or we should not. If we should I fail to see how god should have a lower standard then we do to live up to. Your excuse fails and epicly so, at avoiding the problem that in one instance you think we should find a cure and in the other instance you fuckin turn the god brain on and say, nope shouldn't be stopped they deserve it. Should there be a cure for cancer or not?

Its pretty fuckin simple:

Either we should be working on a cure for cancer, because these people don't deserve to die or we shouldn't be because they deserve to die because they are getting what they deserve. You are playing both sides of the fence and being a fuckin hypocrite. End of story.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 8:32:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Im just curious for anyone who has ever used the excuse that god lets children die of cancer because they deserve it. Why then are you completely hypocritical and believe we should fight to cure a disease that the people deserve to have.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 8:37:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 8:18:37 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:15:29 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.

Your excuse is missing the point and intellectually dishonest. Either we should treat these kids for cancer or we should not. If we should I fail to see how god should have a lower standard then we do to live up to. Your excuse fails and epicly so, at avoiding the problem that in one instance you think we should find a cure and in the other instance you fuckin turn the god brain on and say, nope shouldn't be stopped they deserve it. Should there be a cure for cancer or not?


Its pretty fuckin simple:

Either we should be working on a cure for cancer, because these people don't deserve to die or we shouldn't be because they deserve to die because they are getting what they deserve. You are playing both sides of the fence and being a fuckin hypocrite. End of story.

Let me try a different way.
We should work towards a cure for any illness.
If God chooses to take a life He Has given then that is a seperate situation.

Christianities hallmark throughout history has been care for the ill and poor. The conversion of multitudes has been due to the deep concern for these people.

However, that does not mean there are not exceptional circumstances for that care.

We agree that dropping the bombs on countless innocents including women and children is generally wrong but it was not wrong in the case of Nukes upon Japan.

The saving of countless good people and the health of the American nation was put before the innocents in the war.

All things must be weighed properly.

You demean what you do not understand.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 8:43:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 8:37:34 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:18:37 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:15:29 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.

Your excuse is missing the point and intellectually dishonest. Either we should treat these kids for cancer or we should not. If we should I fail to see how god should have a lower standard then we do to live up to. Your excuse fails and epicly so, at avoiding the problem that in one instance you think we should find a cure and in the other instance you fuckin turn the god brain on and say, nope shouldn't be stopped they deserve it. Should there be a cure for cancer or not?


Its pretty fuckin simple:

Either we should be working on a cure for cancer, because these people don't deserve to die or we shouldn't be because they deserve to die because they are getting what they deserve. You are playing both sides of the fence and being a fuckin hypocrite. End of story.

Let me try a different way.
We should work towards a cure for any illness.
If God chooses to take a life He Has given then that is a seperate situation.

Christianities hallmark throughout history has been care for the ill and poor. The conversion of multitudes has been due to the deep concern for these people.

However, that does not mean there are not exceptional circumstances for that care.

We agree that dropping the bombs on countless innocents including women and children is generally wrong but it was not wrong in the case of Nukes upon Japan.

The saving of countless good people and the health of the American nation was put before the innocents in the war.

All things must be weighed properly.

You demean what you do not understand.

The problem is we understand that child shouldn't suffer of cancer, until you all of a sudden are forced to view it from your retarded god goggles. At that point its all fuckin mysterious, I call bull$hit.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 8:59:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 8:43:36 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:37:34 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:18:37 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:15:29 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.

Your excuse is missing the point and intellectually dishonest. Either we should treat these kids for cancer or we should not. If we should I fail to see how god should have a lower standard then we do to live up to. Your excuse fails and epicly so, at avoiding the problem that in one instance you think we should find a cure and in the other instance you fuckin turn the god brain on and say, nope shouldn't be stopped they deserve it. Should there be a cure for cancer or not?


Its pretty fuckin simple:

Either we should be working on a cure for cancer, because these people don't deserve to die or we shouldn't be because they deserve to die because they are getting what they deserve. You are playing both sides of the fence and being a fuckin hypocrite. End of story.

Let me try a different way.
We should work towards a cure for any illness.
If God chooses to take a life He Has given then that is a seperate situation.

Christianities hallmark throughout history has been care for the ill and poor. The conversion of multitudes has been due to the deep concern for these people.

However, that does not mean there are not exceptional circumstances for that care.

We agree that dropping the bombs on countless innocents including women and children is generally wrong but it was not wrong in the case of Nukes upon Japan.

The saving of countless good people and the health of the American nation was put before the innocents in the war.

All things must be weighed properly.

You demean what you do not understand.


The problem is we understand that child shouldn't suffer of cancer, until you all of a sudden are forced to view it from your retarded god goggles. At that point its all fuckin mysterious, I call bull$hit.

A child should not have a nuclear bomb dropped on him either.
However, in Japan 1940's I agree that those children should have had a bomb dropped on them. A greater good was served for the entire world for the sacrifice for those innocents.

Only if you possess omniscience could you determine appropriate responses to the individual situations.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:03:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 8:59:20 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:43:36 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:37:34 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:18:37 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:15:29 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.

Your excuse is missing the point and intellectually dishonest. Either we should treat these kids for cancer or we should not. If we should I fail to see how god should have a lower standard then we do to live up to. Your excuse fails and epicly so, at avoiding the problem that in one instance you think we should find a cure and in the other instance you fuckin turn the god brain on and say, nope shouldn't be stopped they deserve it. Should there be a cure for cancer or not?


Its pretty fuckin simple:

Either we should be working on a cure for cancer, because these people don't deserve to die or we shouldn't be because they deserve to die because they are getting what they deserve. You are playing both sides of the fence and being a fuckin hypocrite. End of story.

Let me try a different way.
We should work towards a cure for any illness.
If God chooses to take a life He Has given then that is a seperate situation.

Christianities hallmark throughout history has been care for the ill and poor. The conversion of multitudes has been due to the deep concern for these people.

However, that does not mean there are not exceptional circumstances for that care.

We agree that dropping the bombs on countless innocents including women and children is generally wrong but it was not wrong in the case of Nukes upon Japan.

The saving of countless good people and the health of the American nation was put before the innocents in the war.

All things must be weighed properly.

You demean what you do not understand.


The problem is we understand that child shouldn't suffer of cancer, until you all of a sudden are forced to view it from your retarded god goggles. At that point its all fuckin mysterious, I call bull$hit.

A child should not have a nuclear bomb dropped on him either.
However, in Japan 1940's I agree that those children should have had a bomb dropped on them. A greater good was served for the entire world for the sacrifice for those innocents.

Only if you possess omniscience could you determine appropriate responses to the individual situations.

If you believe these children dying of cancer serves a greater purpose, please tell me why you would agree that the disease needs to be cured?
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:06:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If there was a God, I'd imagine he'd set forth unique situations to test the faith and perseverance of his creations. As far as I'm aware, Christianity states that man suffers because of his original sin. It's simple, then, to understand that we each will have our own trials to bear in order to redeem ourselves. Some will suffer more than others, but the circumstances aren't what is important - it would be how we deal with it that would decide the ultimate fate.

(Lol, it's interesting to argue on the side of religion)
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:11:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Izbo, if I may ask: why is it that you feel compelled to constantly attempt to validate your own belief while doing nothing productive?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:11:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Oh, Izbo10, back to your old antics, again?? Perhaps you could try refuting Christian arguments rather than insulting the one who is actually arguing, for once....
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:13:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 9:11:04 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Izbo, if I may ask: why is it that you feel compelled to constantly attempt to validate your own belief while doing nothing productive?

productive says the 15 year old in 1st grade.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:15:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 9:13:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 9:11:04 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Izbo, if I may ask: why is it that you feel compelled to constantly attempt to validate your own belief while doing nothing productive?

productive says the 15 year old in 1st grade.

Hm.

1) You didn't answer my question.
2) My job at this age is to get an education, which I'm doing.
3) I bet you don't do anything productive. You just basement dwell all day.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:17:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 9:15:33 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 10/11/2011 9:13:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 9:11:04 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Izbo, if I may ask: why is it that you feel compelled to constantly attempt to validate your own belief while doing nothing productive?

productive says the 15 year old in 1st grade.

Hm.

1) You didn't answer my question.
It is indeed a way for Izbo10 to run away, though in the guise of an angry person.
2) My job at this age is to get an education, which I'm doing.
And it is irrelevant to the entire discussion....Izbo10...
3) I bet you don't do anything productive. You just basement dwell all day.

Well, other than his occupation, he seems to at least help raise the entertainment levels of the site...
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:19:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 9:13:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 9:11:04 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Izbo, if I may ask: why is it that you feel compelled to constantly attempt to validate your own belief while doing nothing productive?

productive says the 15 year old in 1st grade.

Skipped my post then? Okay.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 9:34:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 9:03:04 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:59:20 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:43:36 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:37:34 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:18:37 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 8:15:29 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 7:54:38 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:29:42 AM, izbo10 wrote:
When it comes to the question of whether a god should stop childhood cancer they don't seem to have a clue, that is 50/50.

When it comes to whether humans should stop childhood cancer they generally would agree.


Funny stuff.

That is not hypocrisy but perspective.

I have already answered this concept in a previous forum. I believe you read it, you had commented.

Here is the same concept:
Generally it is wrong to hit people. It is not wrong to hit bad people who are trying to kill you.
Mismo = It is not wrong to make your child sit in time out but it is wrong to randomly grab a child off the street and make them sit in time out.

I could go on and on.
To define that as hypocrisy, I believe is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually inept.

Your excuse is missing the point and intellectually dishonest. Either we should treat these kids for cancer or we should not. If we should I fail to see how god should have a lower standard then we do to live up to. Your excuse fails and epicly so, at avoiding the problem that in one instance you think we should find a cure and in the other instance you fuckin turn the god brain on and say, nope shouldn't be stopped they deserve it. Should there be a cure for cancer or not?


Its pretty fuckin simple:

Either we should be working on a cure for cancer, because these people don't deserve to die or we shouldn't be because they deserve to die because they are getting what they deserve. You are playing both sides of the fence and being a fuckin hypocrite. End of story.

Let me try a different way.
We should work towards a cure for any illness.
If God chooses to take a life He Has given then that is a seperate situation.

Christianities hallmark throughout history has been care for the ill and poor. The conversion of multitudes has been due to the deep concern for these people.

However, that does not mean there are not exceptional circumstances for that care.

We agree that dropping the bombs on countless innocents including women and children is generally wrong but it was not wrong in the case of Nukes upon Japan.

The saving of countless good people and the health of the American nation was put before the innocents in the war.

All things must be weighed properly.

You demean what you do not understand.


The problem is we understand that child shouldn't suffer of cancer, until you all of a sudden are forced to view it from your retarded god goggles. At that point its all fuckin mysterious, I call bull$hit.

A child should not have a nuclear bomb dropped on him either.
However, in Japan 1940's I agree that those children should have had a bomb dropped on them. A greater good was served for the entire world for the sacrifice for those innocents.

Only if you possess omniscience could you determine appropriate responses to the individual situations.


If you believe these children dying of cancer serves a greater purpose, please tell me why you would agree that the disease needs to be cured?

It glorifies God to cure the helpless. That is what He did for us.
If God does not allow us to do so we submit to His will. We know that death is not the end. Suffering if for increasing our strength.
I would generally prefer to pray rather than inject medicines into people either way.

The efficacious nature of most medicines is quite in doubt anyway. Tylenol will stop a headache but overuse in a lifetime will cause liver failure etc...

Woohoo Vitamin E will cure prostate cancer! Doh! We were wrong, nevermind high doses cause it..... sorry all of you that listened to us doctors...

Hmm who would I put my faith in?
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 10:51:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I will give extra credit to the first person other then me on this post to say something intelligent. I don't think it will happen.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 10:55:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 10:51:40 PM, izbo10 wrote:
I will give extra credit to the first person other then me on this post to say something intelligent. I don't think it will happen.

Seriously which better describes you:

To the best of my knowledge if I was god I would not let children die of cancer.

To the best of my knowledge I would let children die of cancer if I was god.

Remember how we judge things is by the best knowledge available. Highly doubt any christian can answer this.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:08:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 10:55:09 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:51:40 PM, izbo10 wrote:
I will give extra credit to the first person other then me on this post to say something intelligent. I don't think it will happen.

Seriously which better describes you:

To the best of my knowledge if I was god I would not let children die of cancer.

To the best of my knowledge I would let children die of cancer if I was god.

Remember how we judge things is by the best knowledge available. Highly doubt any christian can answer this.

Dude, you let the children die because you have the power to give them eternal life as the Christian-fricking-God.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:18:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:08:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:55:09 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:51:40 PM, izbo10 wrote:
I will give extra credit to the first person other then me on this post to say something intelligent. I don't think it will happen.

Seriously which better describes you:

To the best of my knowledge if I was god I would not let children die of cancer.

To the best of my knowledge I would let children die of cancer if I was god.

Remember how we judge things is by the best knowledge available. Highly doubt any christian can answer this.

Dude, you let the children die because you have the power to give them eternal life as the Christian-fricking-God.

Then by the reasoning as a human it is immoral to torture them by trying to cure them when they will have it so much better if they die. No, extra credit for you idiot.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:22:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:18:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:08:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:55:09 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:51:40 PM, izbo10 wrote:
I will give extra credit to the first person other then me on this post to say something intelligent. I don't think it will happen.

Seriously which better describes you:

To the best of my knowledge if I was god I would not let children die of cancer.

To the best of my knowledge I would let children die of cancer if I was god.

Remember how we judge things is by the best knowledge available. Highly doubt any christian can answer this.

Dude, you let the children die because you have the power to give them eternal life as the Christian-fricking-God.


Then by the reasoning as a human it is immoral to torture them by trying to cure them when they will have it so much better if they die. No, extra credit for you idiot.

Next person to post please take the whopping 30 seconds to think before you submit your post, is this post retarded and when the answer is yes don't post it. Otherwise you end up looking stupid like the previous posters.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:27:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:18:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:08:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:55:09 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:51:40 PM, izbo10 wrote:
I will give extra credit to the first person other then me on this post to say something intelligent. I don't think it will happen.

Seriously which better describes you:

To the best of my knowledge if I was god I would not let children die of cancer.

To the best of my knowledge I would let children die of cancer if I was god.

Remember how we judge things is by the best knowledge available. Highly doubt any christian can answer this.

Dude, you let the children die because you have the power to give them eternal life as the Christian-fricking-God.


Then by the reasoning as a human it is immoral to torture them by trying to cure them when they will have it so much better if they die. No, extra credit for you idiot.

No. You're incorrect. Also, there is no need for insults.

You stated above to remember to judge things by what knowledge we have available. Faith recognizes that we cannot one hundred percent confirm the nature of a life beyond. We can believe in it, but we cannot truly understand the nature of it. If this is true (which it is, since you cannot tell me the nature of an afterlife) then it is wrong for someone to end a life since we cannot guarantee our action has just cause. A God, however, who is aware of the nature of an afterlife, has this knowledge. Therefore, he need not concern himself with the impacts of the life before.

Please remember your own parameters before critiquing an argument of which you outlined but don't understand yourself.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:28:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you would like to outline a debate for this, I would consider taking you as a challenge. It'd be interesting since I do not consider myself religious.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:30:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:27:01 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:18:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:08:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:55:09 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/11/2011 10:51:40 PM, izbo10 wrote:
I will give extra credit to the first person other then me on this post to say something intelligent. I don't think it will happen.

Seriously which better describes you:

To the best of my knowledge if I was god I would not let children die of cancer.

To the best of my knowledge I would let children die of cancer if I was god.

Remember how we judge things is by the best knowledge available. Highly doubt any christian can answer this.

Dude, you let the children die because you have the power to give them eternal life as the Christian-fricking-God.


Then by the reasoning as a human it is immoral to torture them by trying to cure them when they will have it so much better if they die. No, extra credit for you idiot.

No. You're incorrect. Also, there is no need for insults.

You stated above to remember to judge things by what knowledge we have available. Faith recognizes that we cannot one hundred percent confirm the nature of a life beyond. We can believe in it, but we cannot truly understand the nature of it. If this is true (which it is, since you cannot tell me the nature of an afterlife) then it is wrong for someone to end a life since we cannot guarantee our action has just cause. A God, however, who is aware of the nature of an afterlife, has this knowledge. Therefore, he need not concern himself with the impacts of the life before.

Please remember your own parameters before critiquing an argument of which you outlined but don't understand yourself.

Again no points towards extra credit to get to first grade. When there is no evidence for something it means we withhold belief on it and there is no evidence that we are alive after death. As a matter of fact if you research the evidence points to there is no life after death. It is not a 50/50 proposition. I guess I may be wrong as you may be just retarded enough to really not be able to evaluate evidence and therefore are trying best available evidence, but it is truly sad.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:36:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you want me to treat you with respect, don't make retarded statements until then you leave me no choice but to insult you as you are showing no ability to make a point.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:53:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:30:29 PM, izbo10 wrote:

Again no points towards extra credit to get to first grade. When there is no evidence for something it means we withhold belief on it and there is no evidence that we are alive after death. As a matter of fact if you research the evidence points to there is no life after death. It is not a 50/50 proposition. I guess I may be wrong as you may be just retarded enough to really not be able to evaluate evidence and therefore are trying best available evidence, but it is truly sad.

Once again, what you state only puts my explanation in better life. Let's alienate God and man for a second: your question is if God would let children with cancer die. To refute this, you state if man were in the same situation, he would always try to save the child's life. You state the parameter that to explain God's action, we must remember only to base our decision to what is known to the agent of the action.

So you are absolutely correct then. If we have no evidence of an afterlife, we're going to save that child's life. That is an issue on its own, that is now resolved.

The next issue is if God would commit the same action. The difference is, saying there was God, that this God would have knowledge of an afterlife. Therefore, he has no reason to protect that child's life.

To use man's knowledge as a determiner for a god's action is incorrect; they do not share the same knowledge. Therefore, I fail to see how your explanation for MAN'S action would prohibit a given GOD'S actions.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:56:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:36:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
If you want me to treat you with respect, don't make retarded statements until then you leave me no choice but to insult you as you are showing no ability to make a point.

Does the ignorance lie in the one making the point, or the one who refuses to see the proper conclusion?

You are basically saying prove the house is blue. When I state the house is blue, your defense is, "No, the CAR is red." You never address the original issue you put forward.

Notice I have not disagreed with any of your statements, only your conclusions. Your failure to understand is not in the creation of points, but in failing to understand how the points do not justify your conclusion.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 12:01:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:56:18 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 10/11/2011 11:36:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
If you want me to treat you with respect, don't make retarded statements until then you leave me no choice but to insult you as you are showing no ability to make a point.

Does the ignorance lie in the one making the point, or the one who refuses to see the proper conclusion?

You are basically saying prove the house is blue. When I state the house is blue, your defense is, "No, the CAR is red." You never address the original issue you put forward.

Notice I have not disagreed with any of your statements, only your conclusions. Your failure to understand is not in the creation of points, but in failing to understand how the points do not justify your conclusion.

I hope you get cancer and there is no cure for it. Does that make you feel like I am asking for something good to happen to you, if not stop fuckin being such a piece of $hit defending this for kids.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.