Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

To all Christians

ATHOS
Posts: 123
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.
What can be expected from insane premises except an insane conclusion? The way to undo an insane conclusion is to consider the sanity of the premises on which it rests.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How long will contradiction stand when its impossible nature is clearly revealed?
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 6:27:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

Your argument is, once again, based on archaic views of hell. Hell isn't a medeival torture rack, it's eternal seperation from God (a choice you make anyway). Ultimately it's not belief in God that matters, that's a by-product, rather it's a relationship with God and a life committed to a just seeking self-forming-good. In other words, those who freely choose hell, choose a life of satisfaction-based happiness where commitment unwantingly follows. Whereas those who choose a committment based life where satisfaction wantingly follows go to heaven insofar as they respond positively to God's saving message for their lives and choices and perferences.

In this way, those who make unjst self-forming decisions of a satisfaction based life, bar the doors of hell shut from the inside; for anyother type of life to them is not only absurd, but a torture rack.
Knologist_Prime
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 7:27:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

(Matthew 5:43-48) "YOU heard that it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 However, I say to YOU: Continue to love YOUR enemies and to pray for those persecuting YOU;
45 that YOU may prove yourselves sons of YOUR Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise upon wicked people and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous.
46 For if YOU love those loving YOU, what reward do YOU have? Are not also the tax collectors doing the same thing?
47 And if YOU greet YOUR brothers only, what extraordinary thing are YOU doing? Are not also the people of the nations doing the same thing?
48 YOU must accordingly be perfect, as YOUR heavenly Father is perfect.

God shows principled love even to unbelievers, but only to a certain degree.
Truth, is bias." - Knologist-Prime
"Words, means, things." - Knologist-Prime
"The Rules of Grammar in any Language, MUST be obeyed." - Knologist-Prime
"Artifacts are FACTS." - Knologist-Prime
ATHOS
Posts: 123
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 8:02:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 6:27:21 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

Your argument is, once again, based on archaic views of hell. Hell isn't a medeival torture rack, it's eternal seperation from God (a choice you make anyway). Ultimately it's not belief in God that matters, that's a by-product, rather it's a relationship with God and a life committed to a just seeking self-forming-good. In other words, those who freely choose hell, choose a life of satisfaction-based happiness where commitment unwantingly follows. Whereas those who choose a committment based life where satisfaction wantingly follows go to heaven insofar as they respond positively to God's saving message for their lives and choices and perferences.

In this way, those who make unjst self-forming decisions of a satisfaction based life, bar the doors of hell shut from the inside; for anyother type of life to them is not only absurd, but a torture rack.

' Your argument is, once again, based on archaic views of hell. '

With so many conflicting interpretations of hell how do you know you have the correct definition: 'eternal seperation from God' ?

My argument is not concerning hell. My argument is about the wisdom and understanding of a supposedly perfect god. Wouldn't god understand why I don't believe in him?
What can be expected from insane premises except an insane conclusion? The way to undo an insane conclusion is to consider the sanity of the premises on which it rests.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How long will contradiction stand when its impossible nature is clearly revealed?
ATHOS
Posts: 123
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 8:19:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 6:27:21 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

Your argument is, once again, based on archaic views of hell. Hell isn't a medeival torture rack, it's eternal seperation from God (a choice you make anyway). Ultimately it's not belief in God that matters, that's a by-product, rather it's a relationship with God and a life committed to a just seeking self-forming-good. In other words, those who freely choose hell, choose a life of satisfaction-based happiness where commitment unwantingly follows. Whereas those who choose a committment based life where satisfaction wantingly follows go to heaven insofar as they respond positively to God's saving message for their lives and choices and perferences.

In this way, those who make unjst self-forming decisions of a satisfaction based life, bar the doors of hell shut from the inside; for anyother type of life to them is not only absurd, but a torture rack.

Your argument is, once again, based on archaic views of hell. '

With so many conflicting interpretations of hell how do you know you have the correct definition: 'eternal seperation from God' ?

My argument is not concerning hell. My argument is about the wisdom and understanding of a supposedly perfect god. Wouldn't god understand why I don't believe in him?
What can be expected from insane premises except an insane conclusion? The way to undo an insane conclusion is to consider the sanity of the premises on which it rests.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How long will contradiction stand when its impossible nature is clearly revealed?
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 10:43:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 8:19:17 AM, ATHOS wrote:
At 7/2/2012 6:27:21 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

Your argument is, once again, based on archaic views of hell. Hell isn't a medeival torture rack, it's eternal seperation from God (a choice you make anyway). Ultimately it's not belief in God that matters, that's a by-product, rather it's a relationship with God and a life committed to a just seeking self-forming-good. In other words, those who freely choose hell, choose a life of satisfaction-based happiness where commitment unwantingly follows. Whereas those who choose a committment based life where satisfaction wantingly follows go to heaven insofar as they respond positively to God's saving message for their lives and choices and perferences.

In this way, those who make unjst self-forming decisions of a satisfaction based life, bar the doors of hell shut from the inside; for anyother type of life to them is not only absurd, but a torture rack.

Your argument is, once again, based on archaic views of hell. '

With so many conflicting interpretations of hell how do you know you have the correct definition: 'eternal seperation from God' ?

It's the most internally (exegetical) coherent & seamless view depicted thoughout the Bible. Yes there's theological coloring illustrative of the common speech in that day (such apocalyptical speech was common but historians & biblical scholars have a robust & developed hermenuetical science to help them extract a sound exegesis from the text). Just because some simple sunday school understanding of hell exists that shouldn't down-grade the actual doctrine.

It helps to take a step back and understand what you're actually arguing. It seems obvious to me that you're arguing step 27 while you're really only at step one. Suppose the bible isn't the inspired word of God, at best then we're agnostic about hell. But does that disprove theism? Not at all.

Let's focus on if theism is even rational then empirical then we can gradually criticize Christian particularism.

My argument is not concerning hell. My argument is about the wisdom and understanding of a supposedly perfect god. Wouldn't god understand why I don't believe in him?

Again, belief doesn't seem to be God's teleos or purpose for mankind, but rather a relationship with him. Belief is a by-product. What you're focusing on is a knowledge by description, what Christianity offers is much more, a knowledge by aquaintence.

And i grant you that God WOULD understand why you don't believe in him, it'd most-likely be the same reason I chose not to, namely because I rejected a relationship with him when I was an atheist. I wanted my own satisfaction-based life rather than a commitment based life.

Ultimately it's never a problem of intellectualism that hinders a person's response to the Gospel, but rather it's a personal choice of rejection. Your intellectualism is just a smoke screen.

Look down through the ages up until today, there's countless brilliant people who believe and don't believe in God, countless who found good arguments for and good arguments against God. You can't say that you stand in a better epistemic position than all those great minds before you. But you can look at the existential virtue of Christianity & make your preference from there, which will have either all eternal significance or none. Either way the choice seems obvious.

As Pascal said, God's given sufficient evidence of his existence for those with an open heart and made his existence sufficiently vague so as not to compell those with a closed heart.

Would your wife or future wife seek to compell you if she knew you didn't want her from the start? It wouldn't seem so. Give this to God at least, he's personal as well as divine.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 10:53:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

This is a good point. It's not my fault there is no evidence for God, and it's not my fault I'm not a gullible fool and I'm a rational being. So if I go to hell simply for being rational and using critical thinking regarding claims that get made regarding the existence of some entity, then Christians definitely believe in a petty God.

A true loving God would understand why I don't believe in him, and would not condemn me for simply using my critical faculties. I just don't see an all loving God thinking "well you had your chance to believe in me, but now your fucked for eternity!"

It just makes no sense...
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

If I hear a claim, I'm either convinced for certain reasons or I'm not. I don't chose whether or not I'm convinced...Another example of a non-choice is when someone tells me a girl just got raped in town, I don't chose to feel bad for this girl, but I do...

So If God condemns people for not believing in his actual existence, he is condemning people who have little choice in the matter.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 11:38:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

I believe you are clearly miscategorizing.
I agree that genetics play a role in say lusting after women.
However, as with everyone's clear experience, rape is a choice.

Liking Coke or Pepsi agreed is a natural disposition. Stealing Coke from stores is not.

We are all predisposed towards a belief in God, THE opposite of your claim above.
But Let us assume your are broken or misfiring. To deny the mountains of evidence for God is NOT a part of a natural disposition. That is a clear choice.

Condemnation for being deliberately obtuse is justified.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 2:15:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 10:53:00 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

This is a good point. It's not my fault there is no evidence for God, and it's not my fault I'm not a gullible fool and I'm a rational being. So if I go to hell simply for being rational and using critical thinking regarding claims that get made regarding the existence of some entity, then Christians definitely believe in a petty God.

A true loving God would understand why I don't believe in him, and would not condemn me for simply using my critical faculties. I just don't see an all loving God thinking "well you had your chance to believe in me, but now your fucked for eternity!"

It just makes no sense...

So leibniz, Pascal, van Inwegan, Craig, Plantinga Morland, McGrew, Penrose, Davies, Rescher, etc are all gullible fools eh?

What's CV resume compared to there's?

I admit that there are many smart atheists out there as well as theists... But to call me a fool is completely unwarranted. You couldn't hold my jockstrap with some of the research I do kid. Please. Christians have as much a ratio of fools as non-Christians.
Websterremembered
Posts: 95
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 2:18:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

it sounds like you actually believe god exists.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 2:19:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

How many times do I have to repeat myself that believe isn't paramount for Christianity? That's a by-product of a relationship with God, what matters is knowledge by acquaintance not by description.

If I hear a claim, I'm either convinced for certain reasons or I'm not. I don't chose whether or not I'm convinced...Another example of a non-choice is when someone tells me a girl just got raped in town, I don't chose to feel bad for this girl, but I do...

So If God condemns people for not believing in his actual existence, he is condemning people who have little choice in the matter.

A choice for a relationship with God is a choice indeed. And it's not that "God sends people to hell" that's archaic, God just fulfills the wish of those not wanting a relationship with him. The gates of hell are barred from the inside.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:26:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 11:38:31 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

I believe you are clearly miscategorizing.
I agree that genetics play a role in say lusting after women.
However, as with everyone's clear experience, rape is a choice.

Liking Coke or Pepsi agreed is a natural disposition. Stealing Coke from stores is not.

We are all predisposed towards a belief in God, THE opposite of your claim above.
But Let us assume your are broken or misfiring. To deny the mountains of evidence for God is NOT a part of a natural disposition. That is a clear choice.

Condemnation for being deliberately obtuse is justified.

"We are all predisposed towards a belief in God"

False.

"To deny the mountains of evidence for God is NOT a part of a natural disposition. That is a clear choice."

There is 0 evidence for God.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:30:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 2:15:01 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 7/2/2012 10:53:00 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

This is a good point. It's not my fault there is no evidence for God, and it's not my fault I'm not a gullible fool and I'm a rational being. So if I go to hell simply for being rational and using critical thinking regarding claims that get made regarding the existence of some entity, then Christians definitely believe in a petty God.

A true loving God would understand why I don't believe in him, and would not condemn me for simply using my critical faculties. I just don't see an all loving God thinking "well you had your chance to believe in me, but now your fucked for eternity!"

It just makes no sense...

So leibniz, Pascal, van Inwegan, Craig, Plantinga Morland, McGrew, Penrose, Davies, Rescher, etc are all gullible fools eh?

What's CV resume compared to there's?

I admit that there are many smart atheists out there as well as theists... But to call me a fool is completely unwarranted. You couldn't hold my jockstrap with some of the research I do kid. Please. Christians have as much a ratio of fools as non-Christians.

I never said all people who believe in God are fools, so please don't put words in my mouth. I just said I personally would have to be a gullible fool to believe it, based on how unconvincing I find argumentation for God to be.

Also, I would be be curious to know how you would be aware of how much research I have done, to make the bold claim that I wouldn't "hold a jockstrap" to the research you do.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:34:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 2:19:36 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

How many times do I have to repeat myself that believe isn't paramount for Christianity? That's a by-product of a relationship with God, what matters is knowledge by acquaintance not by description.

If I hear a claim, I'm either convinced for certain reasons or I'm not. I don't chose whether or not I'm convinced...Another example of a non-choice is when someone tells me a girl just got raped in town, I don't chose to feel bad for this girl, but I do...

So If God condemns people for not believing in his actual existence, he is condemning people who have little choice in the matter.

A choice for a relationship with God is a choice indeed. And it's not that "God sends people to hell" that's archaic, God just fulfills the wish of those not wanting a relationship with him. The gates of hell are barred from the inside.

You are confusing two concepts:

(i) Believing God exists
(ii) Choosing a relationship with God, after a belief in his existence has already been established

(i) must be accomplished before (ii) anyway...

There actually has to be good reasons for why he exists to ground reasonable belief in God, and quite frankly, I do not find very many. This is obviously a step that must be undertaken, before any reasonable relationship is to take place as well.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:41:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 11:38:31 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

I believe you are clearly miscategorizing.
I agree that genetics play a role in say lusting after women.
However, as with everyone's clear experience, rape is a choice.

WTF? ESPECIALLY regarding what RT said, this sentence makes absolutely no sense and exemplifies a deep misunderstanding of rape. This is not even close to a good point or an apt analogy regarding what RT was trying to say.
Liking Coke or Pepsi agreed is a natural disposition. Stealing Coke from stores is not.

We are all predisposed towards a belief in God, THE opposite of your claim above.
But Let us assume your are broken or misfiring. To deny the mountains of evidence for God is NOT a part of a natural disposition. That is a clear choice.

Condemnation for being deliberately obtuse is justified.

To have faith in god despite the clear LACK of evidence requires being deliberately obtuse. Faith itself requires being deliberately obtuse. If there were "mountains of evidence," faith would not be a part of religious persons vocabulary. But alas, it is not only a part of the vocab, but viewed as a virtue. I'm glad you agree that condemnation of such behavior is justified.

RT is saying that you can't force yourself to have faith just as he can't force himself to stop lusting after a woman he finds attractive or stop finding Coke to taste better than Pepsi.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:49:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 3:41:19 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 11:38:31 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

I believe you are clearly miscategorizing.
I agree that genetics play a role in say lusting after women.
However, as with everyone's clear experience, rape is a choice.

WTF? ESPECIALLY regarding what RT said, this sentence makes absolutely no sense and exemplifies a deep misunderstanding of rape. This is not even close to a good point or an apt analogy regarding what RT was trying to say.
Liking Coke or Pepsi agreed is a natural disposition. Stealing Coke from stores is not.

We are all predisposed towards a belief in God, THE opposite of your claim above.
But Let us assume your are broken or misfiring. To deny the mountains of evidence for God is NOT a part of a natural disposition. That is a clear choice.

Condemnation for being deliberately obtuse is justified.

To have faith in god despite the clear LACK of evidence requires being deliberately obtuse. Faith itself requires being deliberately obtuse. If there were "mountains of evidence," faith would not be a part of religious persons vocabulary. But alas, it is not only a part of the vocab, but viewed as a virtue. I'm glad you agree that condemnation of such behavior is justified.

RT is saying that you can't force yourself to have faith just as he can't force himself to stop lusting after a woman he finds attractive or stop finding Coke to taste better than Pepsi.

Blasphemy!!!!

Pepsi rules!
Debate.org Moderator
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:51:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 3:49:31 PM, airmax1227 wrote:

Blasphemy!!!!

Pepsi rules!

haha I used to think that... then I took the Pepsi challenge. Pepsi didn't win :P

Sierra Mist wins the ultimate though...
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for going against God??
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 3:54:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for not being fear-mongered into believing a claim for which there is little evidence??

fix'd

I can't speak for anthos, but I certainly am of that opinion.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 4:11:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 3:54:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for not being fear-mongered into believing a claim for which there is little evidence??

fix'd

I can't speak for anthos, but I certainly am of that opinion.

He's making an argument against God's rationality, but leaving out an important factor.

If letting people know the consequences of their actions is fear-mongering then so be it. I'd call that giving them the info they need to make an informed decision.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 4:19:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:11:49 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:54:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for not being fear-mongered into believing a claim for which there is little evidence??

fix'd

I can't speak for anthos, but I certainly am of that opinion.

He's making an argument against God's rationality, but leaving out an important factor.

If letting people know the consequences of their actions is fear-mongering then so be it. I'd call that giving them the info they need to make an informed decision.

Mmmm somewhat of an informed decision. You are informed of the consequences, granted, but you aren't given a satisfactory amount of information which shows you this heaven/hell dichotomy even exists. And if you aren't satisfied with the evidence for the heaven/hell dichotomy (i.e. consequences), where does that leave you? Right where anthos is, I presume. So where some people might be fear-mongered by the mere mention of the consequences, others say, "but I couldn't even believe in this dichotomy to begin with!"
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 4:52:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 3:30:56 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 2:15:01 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 7/2/2012 10:53:00 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

This is a good point. It's not my fault there is no evidence for God, and it's not my fault I'm not a gullible fool and I'm a rational being. So if I go to hell simply for being rational and using critical thinking regarding claims that get made regarding the existence of some entity, then Christians definitely believe in a petty God.

A true loving God would understand why I don't believe in him, and would not condemn me for simply using my critical faculties. I just don't see an all loving God thinking "well you had your chance to believe in me, but now your fucked for eternity!"

It just makes no sense...

So leibniz, Pascal, van Inwegan, Craig, Plantinga Morland, McGrew, Penrose, Davies, Rescher, etc are all gullible fools eh?

What's CV resume compared to there's?

I admit that there are many smart atheists out there as well as theists... But to call me a fool is completely unwarranted. You couldn't hold my jockstrap with some of the research I do kid. Please. Christians have as much a ratio of fools as non-Christians.

I never said all people who believe in God are fools, so please don't put words in my mouth. I just said I personally would have to be a gullible fool to believe it, based on how unconvincing I find argumentation for God to be.

Fair enough. Good clarification. But by the same reasoning, I would be a gullible fool to adopt atheism since how unconvincing I find atheist arguments compared to my immediate experience + at least 21 external arguments.

Also, I would be be curious to know how you would be aware of how much research I have done, to make the bold claim that I wouldn't "hold a jockstrap" to the research you do.

Name your citations! I'll give it a fair reading. I work for an energy company so it's illegal to read mine, but yours I can read. Go ahead & pretend I've never done research for the moment. And you have- I'm willing to give you a fair reading. I'm willing to trust ya- go on.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 4:59:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 3:34:11 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 2:19:36 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 7/2/2012 11:00:56 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Plus belief isn't a choice anyway, I didn't chose to not believe in God. This is similar to how I didn't chose to like the t*ts or a*s of a girl, or chose to like Coke over Pepsi.

How many times do I have to repeat myself that believe isn't paramount for Christianity? That's a by-product of a relationship with God, what matters is knowledge by acquaintance not by description.

If I hear a claim, I'm either convinced for certain reasons or I'm not. I don't chose whether or not I'm convinced...Another example of a non-choice is when someone tells me a girl just got raped in town, I don't chose to feel bad for this girl, but I do...

So If God condemns people for not believing in his actual existence, he is condemning people who have little choice in the matter.

A choice for a relationship with God is a choice indeed. And it's not that "God sends people to hell" that's archaic, God just fulfills the wish of those not wanting a relationship with him. The gates of hell are barred from the inside.

You are confusing two concepts:

How would I be confusing two concepts when I named them for what they are, a knowledge by description vs a knowledge by acquaintance. A distinction B.Russell made.

(i) Believing God exists
(ii) Choosing a relationship with God, after a belief in his existence has already been established

(i) must be accomplished before (ii) anyway...

Who says? Sounds arbitrary to me actually. What about when you conceive of your future spouse? Did she HAVE TO exist in order for you to desire a relationship with her, or a life pleasing to her? Of course not. You adjusted accordingly though- Probably tried to beef up in the gym so that when you do meet that "special someone" she'll find you as desirable as you find her. Even though you had no clue if you would ever meet that "special someone."

How is a relationship with God which entails a "beefed up" moral life any different?

There actually has to be good reasons for why he exists to ground reasonable belief in God, and quite frankly, I do not find very many.

BooHoo? Why do you talk about it so much then? Why the disdain? Why presume you'd be gullible rather than just mistaken?

This is obviously a step that must be undertaken, before any reasonable relationship is to take place as well.

I just showed that that's not a necessary condition for a relationship.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 10:15:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:19:06 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:11:49 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:54:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for not being fear-mongered into believing a claim for which there is little evidence??

fix'd

I can't speak for anthos, but I certainly am of that opinion.

He's making an argument against God's rationality, but leaving out an important factor.

If letting people know the consequences of their actions is fear-mongering then so be it. I'd call that giving them the info they need to make an informed decision.

Mmmm somewhat of an informed decision. You are informed of the consequences, granted, but you aren't given a satisfactory amount of information which shows you this heaven/hell dichotomy even exists. And if you aren't satisfied with the evidence for the heaven/hell dichotomy (i.e. consequences), where does that leave you? Right where anthos is, I presume. So where some people might be fear-mongered by the mere mention of the consequences, others say, "but I couldn't even believe in this dichotomy to begin with!"

That's where free will comes in to play. You have the freedom to ignore the evidence, or deny that it's evidence of God.

I don't see how this type of "fear mongering" is any worse than the intimidation that anti-theists use. They argue that believers are imbeciles and that non-believers are so much more intellectually advanced, in order to help convince people. So what's the big difference??
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2012 10:22:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 10:15:03 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:19:06 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:11:49 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:54:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for not being fear-mongered into believing a claim for which there is little evidence??

fix'd

I can't speak for anthos, but I certainly am of that opinion.

He's making an argument against God's rationality, but leaving out an important factor.

If letting people know the consequences of their actions is fear-mongering then so be it. I'd call that giving them the info they need to make an informed decision.

Mmmm somewhat of an informed decision. You are informed of the consequences, granted, but you aren't given a satisfactory amount of information which shows you this heaven/hell dichotomy even exists. And if you aren't satisfied with the evidence for the heaven/hell dichotomy (i.e. consequences), where does that leave you? Right where anthos is, I presume. So where some people might be fear-mongered by the mere mention of the consequences, others say, "but I couldn't even believe in this dichotomy to begin with!"

That's where free will comes in to play. You have the freedom to ignore the evidence, or deny that it's evidence of God.

Or deny that there is any evidence at all.
I don't see how this type of "fear mongering" is any worse than the intimidation that anti-theists use. They argue that believers are imbeciles and that non-believers are so much more intellectually advanced, in order to help convince people. So what's the big difference??

An eternal punishment of torment..?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 11:51:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 10:22:40 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 10:15:03 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:19:06 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:11:49 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:54:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for not being fear-mongered into believing a claim for which there is little evidence??

fix'd

I can't speak for anthos, but I certainly am of that opinion.

He's making an argument against God's rationality, but leaving out an important factor.

If letting people know the consequences of their actions is fear-mongering then so be it. I'd call that giving them the info they need to make an informed decision.

Mmmm somewhat of an informed decision. You are informed of the consequences, granted, but you aren't given a satisfactory amount of information which shows you this heaven/hell dichotomy even exists. And if you aren't satisfied with the evidence for the heaven/hell dichotomy (i.e. consequences), where does that leave you? Right where anthos is, I presume. So where some people might be fear-mongered by the mere mention of the consequences, others say, "but I couldn't even believe in this dichotomy to begin with!"

That's where free will comes in to play. You have the freedom to ignore the evidence, or deny that it's evidence of God.

Or deny that there is any evidence at all.

The universe, or the fact that we're even here is claimed as evidence of God the Creator, so denying that there is any evidence when you've been told the truth isn't likely to win your case, if you're wrong.

I don't see how this type of "fear mongering" is any worse than the intimidation that anti-theists use. They argue that believers are imbeciles and that non-believers are so much more intellectually advanced, in order to help convince people. So what's the big difference??

An eternal punishment of torment..?

You'd prefer an eternity of paradise in return for doing the wrong thing?? Doesn't sound reasonable to me. There are grave consequences for making the wrong decisions in our everyday lives here on earth. I don't get why people expect there to be no consequences for denying God.

You choose to be seperated from God now, so why does that being your eternity bother you??
Tnkissfan
Posts: 199
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 12:55:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 10:53:00 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

This is a good point. It's not my fault there is no evidence for God, and it's not my fault I'm not a gullible fool and I'm a rational being. So if I go to hell simply for being rational and using critical thinking regarding claims that get made regarding the existence of some entity, then Christians definitely believe in a petty God.

A true loving God would understand why I don't believe in him, and would not condemn me for simply using my critical faculties. I just don't see an all loving God thinking "well you had your chance to believe in me, but now your fucked for eternity!"

It just makes no sense...
Yep......you go with that.....
Tnkissfan
Posts: 199
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 1:21:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 10:22:40 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 10:15:03 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:19:06 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:11:49 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:54:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 7/2/2012 3:51:50 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

He's also a just God, and there are consequences for making wrong decisions. Are you of the opinion that you should be rewarded for not being fear-mongered into believing a claim for which there is little evidence??

fix'd

I can't speak for anthos, but I certainly am of that opinion.

He's making an argument against God's rationality, but leaving out an important factor.

If letting people know the consequences of their actions is fear-mongering then so be it. I'd call that giving them the info they need to make an informed decision.

Mmmm somewhat of an informed decision. You are informed of the consequences, granted, but you aren't given a satisfactory amount of information which shows you this heaven/hell dichotomy even exists. And if you aren't satisfied with the evidence for the heaven/hell dichotomy (i.e. consequences), where does that leave you? Right where anthos is, I presume. So where some people might be fear-mongered by the mere mention of the consequences, others say, "but I couldn't even believe in this dichotomy to begin with!"

That's where free will comes in to play. You have the freedom to ignore the evidence, or deny that it's evidence of God.

Or deny that there is any evidence at all.
I don't see how this type of "fear mongering" is any worse than the intimidation that anti-theists use. They argue that believers are imbeciles and that non-believers are so much more intellectually advanced, in order to help convince people. So what's the big difference??

An eternal punishment of torment..?

If you think God and Christianity are all b******t anyway then you don't believe in hell. So,why are you even talking about eternal punishment?
Knologist_Prime
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 5:28:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/2/2012 4:37:04 AM, ATHOS wrote:
If the Christian god is real, and if this god is perfect, wouldn't his understanding also be perfect? Wouldn't he KNOW and UNDERSTAND why I refuse to believe in him? And if he is truly compassionate and loving, shouldn't he spare me from the torments of hell?

Christians I would say, If your god dooms people to hell for simply not believing, your god is not loving nor compassionate.

Here's something you can understand about God. Whether you believe in "God" or not.

God: Authority Figure

Authority Figure has the right to set Rules down and expects them to be followed.
(Psalm 25:8, 9) "Good and upright is Jehovah. That is why he instructs sinners in the way. (9) He will cause the meek ones to walk in [his] judicial decision, And he will teach the meek ones his way."

Example: Parent(s), Property Owners, Business Owners, Legislatures, Teachers, Private Establishments; all set rules.

Why?

It's their Right to have their views and administration to be followed.

You can't argue this point. Reality and experience has made this a fact.
Can't argue facts.

God made and owns the Earth. Has set a definite criteria on the type of people He wants to live on Earth.
(Isaiah 45:18) "For this is what Jehovah has said, the Creator of the heavens, He the [true] God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, He the One who firmly established it, who did not create it simply for nothing, who formed it even to be inhabited: "I am Jehovah, and there is no one else.""

Similar to a Owner of an apartment building. The type and quality of people that the Owner is looking for that meets the Owner's criteria.
(Psalm 37:10, 11) "And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more; And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be. (11) But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth, And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace."

Meek means someone who is teachable as to the truth of things, realities, laws, principles, facts. Someone not arrogant, foolish, selfish, willful, contrarian for the sake of contradicting. (we all know someone like that. not worth hanging around)

Now, picture that same apartment building with renters who choose to stop following the Owner's Rules. The bad renters start wrecking the unit they live in. Because the units share common walls, other renters are affected the bad conduct of the bad renters and a cascade of bad effects the apartment building.

What is the logical, reasonable, legal, responsible and loving thing for the Owner to do?
The answer is quite obvious, or at least it should be to a thinking person.

Jehovah God, will restore the Earth back to it's whole beauty with humans who will want to live under God's government with Jesus, Son of God as God's appointed King.
(Psalm 2:4-12) "The very One sitting in the heavens will laugh; Jehovah himself will hold them in derision. (5)At that time he will speak to them in his anger And in his hot displeasure he will disturb them, (6) [Saying:] "I, even I, have installed my king Upon Zion, my holy mountain."  (7) Let me refer to the decree of Jehovah; He has said to me: "You are my son; I, today, I have become your father.  (8) Ask of me, that I may give nations as your inheritance And the ends of the earth as your own possession.  (9) You will break them with an iron scepter, As though a potter's vessel you will dash them to pieces." (10) And now, O kings, exercise insight; Let yourselves be corrected, O judges of the earth. (11) Serve Jehovah with fear And be joyful with trembling. (12) Kiss the son, that He may not become incensed And YOU may not perish [from] the way, For his anger flares up easily. Happy are all those taking refuge in him."
(Psalm 110:1, 2) "The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord is: "Sit at my right hand Until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet."  2 The rod of your strength Jehovah will send out of Zion, [saying:] "Go subduing in the midst of your enemies.""
(Daniel 2:44, 45) "And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite; (45) forasmuch as you beheld that out of the mountain a stone was cut not by hands, and [that] it crushed the iron, the copper, the molded clay, the silver and the gold. The grand God himself has made known to the king what is to occur after this. And the dream is reliable, and the interpretation of it is trustworthy."
(Matthew 6:9, 10) "YOU must pray, then, this way: "‘Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified. (10) Let your kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also upon earth."

So whether you believe in God or not, His purpose toward the Earth and obedient mankind is still going to happen. Jesus ministry was about a government established from the heavens to fix all the problems on the Earth that enemies of God have done.

It's just way better to be informed, whether you believe in God or not, then you can not say, "I didn't know!"

So when Armageddon happens, which is a GOOD thing, because that's what the model prayer is really talking about, "God's Kingdom" to DESTROY all human corrupt governments off the face of the Earth; that's what Jesus taught all his "true worshipers" to do. [Re-read it s-l-o-w-l-y, Matt 6:9,10] (John 4:23) "Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the [true worshipers] will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him."

So since Jesus identified "true worshipers", then it stands to reason that there are 'false worshipers', too?

As far as the state of being dead, real simple. You have nothing to fear about being tortured in some mythical afterlife.

(Ecclesiastes 9:5) "For the living are conscious that they will die; [but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all], neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten."
(Ecclesiastes 9:10) "All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is [no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol]*, the place to which you are going."
*Footnote: "In Sheol." Heb., bish·'ohl; T, "the house of the grave"; Gr., hai'dei; Lat., in'fe·ros. [T] - Targums, Aram. paraphrases of parts of H.S.
(Psalm 146:3, 4) "Do not put YOUR trust in nobles, Nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs. (4) His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; In that day [his thoughts do perish]."
(Ezekiel 18:4) "Look! All the souls—to me they belong. As the soul of the father so likewise the soul of the son—to me they belong. The soul that is sinning—it itself will die."
(Genesis 3:19) "In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return."
(Genesis 2:7) "And Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul."

Where were we before we were conceived? Out of all the time and combinations of sperm and egg, we were non-existent. Therefore, same is so when we die, we go back to non-existence.

But God will resurrect people as part of his purpose, which would be another discussion.
Truth, is bias." - Knologist-Prime
"Words, means, things." - Knologist-Prime
"The Rules of Grammar in any Language, MUST be obeyed." - Knologist-Prime
"Artifacts are FACTS." - Knologist-Prime