IAC: So Med Woman, are you a pantheist/animist? ************* M*W: Do you speak and understand English? I believe I've made it very clear that I am an atheist. Is there any part of this that you don't understand?
IAC: So you have the faith that there is no creator God, how can you be so sure? ************* M*W: It is NOT a matter of faith but one of reason. For there to exist a creative higher power, that is illogical. It makes no sense at all. The premise is disputable and deniable. The burden of proof of a creator god is on the one who believes, not on the ones who don't. I am sure no god exists, and therefore, I cannot believe in one. However, you have the right to believe as you wish, and I would support your right to be able to do so, even though I know you have been mislead.
IAC: Because I can't "prove" that God exists, that means He can't exist? I don't see any logic there. ************* M*W: You continue to read your own thoughts into my words. You can't prove a god exists, but you believe he exists on FAITH. That is your perogative. I can't prove a negative that god doesn't exist, and I base that on LOGIC and REASON. That is my perogative. Because you believe a god exists, you credit that god with everything you can and cannot explain. Because I don't believe a god exists, I credit no god for anything I can or cannot explain. The reason you misunderstand so much on this forum is that you must have a reading comprehension deficit. You really need to work on that for your own sake.
No, you said that because it can't be "proven" that God exists is why you are an atheist, logic dictates that since you don't want to step out with God, you should be an agnostic, to go atheist with your logic is inane at best.
Did i say we where not even to try to be at peace with each other? No i did not. Of course we are to do our best to live peaceably and seek peace with all men. But endeavouring to seek peace is not the same as believing we can achieve peace. It is the belief that peace can be achieved that is the vain belief, not the belief in endeavouring to seek to live peaceably with all men. Can’t you see the point i am making? I believe in damage limitation, not damage elimination. One belief is worthy, the other is fantasy. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Yes beautiful scriptures there Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I agree. Pursue is a different word to Achieve. We are also to pursue holiness but we all know only too well that we will never achieve holiness in this current human configuration. Pursuing holiness is all about evil limitation and loving maximization. Not about achieving evil elimination and loving perfection. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
IAC: No, you said that because it can't be "proven" that God exists is why you are an atheist, logic dictates that since you don't want to step out with God, you should be an agnostic, to go atheist with your logic is inane at best. ************* M*W: You don't know what you are talking about. You do not know what is in my mind. I am not agnostic. I am atheist. Why would anyone believe in something that cannot be proven? That's inane.
You can't prove He doesn't exist, so agnosticism would be the only logical recourse, short of going with Him.
What about this one: Matthew 10:34 "Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword." - Jesus New King James Version
The context of the scripture is very important and knowing what happened soon after the death and resurrection of Jesus is also important: Matthew 10 34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’[e] 37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it. After the death and resurrection of Jesus a percentage (and i do not know what the percentage was, it is not important) of Jews came to believe in Jesus as their Messiah, They where the first Christians. What the word of Jesus had done was bring about a division within the Jewish community this division often ran within families. A mother believing and a daughter disbelieving a son believing and a father disbelieving. The power and worldly authority still rested with those who rejected Jesus as Messiah. So they started a pogrom against the first Christians. Many of the first Christians where betrayed by their own family members to that authority. So the sword that Jesus is talking about it both figurative and literal. They where divided from their families as if a sword had cut them apart and they faced the sword/death for their belief in Jesus. But of course Jesus did not call upon His follower to take up the literal sword against the worldly authorities. Our sword is the Word of God not carnal weapons. This is not just a historical thing. I know what it is like to be divided from my earthly family by the figurative sword of the Word of God, Many in my family do not believe as i do. Maybe in the future when persecution comes they will betray me also? They follow another authority. So the words of Matthew 10 are still as relevant for me today as they where then. Another point. Jesus will bring a real sword to bear when He returns to earth at His second coming. He himself will avenge the blood of the saints. At least 200 million solders of the anti-christ will die on the day of His return at the battle of Armageddon. So yes Jesus will not return the same way He came the first time. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
IAC: You can't prove He doesn't exist, so agnosticism would be the only logical recourse, short of going with Him. ************* M*W: I couldn't care less if Jesus' existence could be proven or disproven. Even if he existed (and it could be proven), I still wouldn't believe he was anybody special. You are defining "agnosticism" wrongly. If I were "agnostic," I would be unsure if a god existed. I've gone way beyond that. Obviously, it threatens you to know there are atheists out there. That's why you persist in making me out to be agnostic. Sorry, it just won't work with me. I'm atheist, and that will never change. I'm afraid you've lost touch with reality. You need help.
