Can Christian Electronic Designers Design?
in [Design]
|
From: D from BC on 20 Apr 2010 19:20 In article <mkugs59tim20dcc18ocjj0nod5k7if7bso(a)4ax.com>, jfields(a)austininstruments.com says... > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:51:29 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> > wrote: > > >In article <odedncc__cXiT1rWnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, > >regor(a)midwest.net says... > >> But yet many more have been killed due to Atheism, what's the ratio, more > >> than 50:1? > >> > >> You are ridiculous to claim death caused by God when there have been so many > >> more deaths caused by Atheism. > >> > >> RogerN > >> > >> > > > > > >It's God's decision to make so many Atheists. > > --- > God's decision was to give us free will, so the decision whether or not > to deny the existence of God is ours. > > JF God gets points for constructing the human mind with free will/choice. Then god takes choice away by choosing for you what options you have for the afterlife. God's free will is better than your free will. God decides/chooses for you the afterlife choices. Choice A: An afterlife with God Choice B: No afterlife You have the free will to choose option A or B. You have no free will to change the options or make more options. You don't have the free will to get an explanation for the grounds of the 2 options. (Guessing fear facilitates indoctrination) Nor can free will make one free to will an afterlife to one's liking. Ultimate true free will is when one is free to will/choose any course of action and not be limited by 2 options from a God. Only God has free will. (At a deeper level God has no free will either.) There is no free will when a God forces upon you a fork in the road when you freely willed not be presented with a fork in the road. Christian engineers are ridiculous to think that there's free will when humans don't have the free will to PRODUCE the afterlife options. -- D from BC British Columbia
From: D from BC on 20 Apr 2010 19:54 In article <ig2ss551inmdqnvtlbv6cu4rrp2p3pmb0q(a)4ax.com>, jonk(a)infinitefactors.org says... > > On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 05:51:40 -0500, "RogerN" > <regor(a)midwest.net> wrote: > > ><snip> > >On Earth there are good places to live and bad places to live, some have it > >pretty good here on Earth while others are not so fortunate. > > In other words, one cannot tell there are Christians here at > all. When Jesus was around, he was basically preaching to > give away all you own to the poor and follow him. At that > time, there were no Christians at all and the religious JF would probably say that Jesus was being figurative (An exaggeration. One can go to the extreme of giving everything away.) However an exaggeration is a form of lying. If I gave all my stuff to you and you gave all your stuff to me and then I gave all your stuff to somebody else then everybody will end up with all the wrong stuff! > leaders had a great deal of perks (like being able to eat > from the fields on Sunday, for example) and this was a "new > idea." Today, religious leaders still drive around in > expensive, chauffeured cars and live in personal comfort and > wealth, and no one much gives away everything they have to > the poor to follow Jesus. The only difference is that there > is a world full of people calling themselves Christians today > and there were roughly zero back then. Nothing has changed, > though. You can't tell there is any difference at all, for > all the CINOs "Christians in name only" that exist now. > > >Couldn't Hell be similar as far as worse and better areas? > > Couldn't Valhalla be similar as far as worse and better > areas? What about samsara from some Buddhist traditions? > Might they be similar as far as worse and better areas? > > Don't you see this for the sheer argument from ignorance and > projection that it is? > > Jon If Christians are making up better fit delusions at least they're making an effort in the right direction.
From: RogerN on 20 Apr 2010 20:27 "D from BC" <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote in message news:MPG.2637de862da347699897e6(a)209.197.12.12... > In article <ig2ss551inmdqnvtlbv6cu4rrp2p3pmb0q(a)4ax.com>, > jonk(a)infinitefactors.org says... >> >> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 05:51:40 -0500, "RogerN" >> <regor(a)midwest.net> wrote: >> >> ><snip> >> >On Earth there are good places to live and bad places to live, some have >> >it >> >pretty good here on Earth while others are not so fortunate. >> >> In other words, one cannot tell there are Christians here at >> all. When Jesus was around, he was basically preaching to >> give away all you own to the poor and follow him. At that >> time, there were no Christians at all and the religious > > JF would probably say that Jesus was being figurative (An exaggeration. > One can go to the extreme of giving everything away.) > However an exaggeration is a form of lying. > > If I gave all my stuff to you and you gave all your stuff to me and then > I gave all your stuff to somebody else then everybody will end up with > all the wrong stuff! That way maybe you could find something you're good at! RogerN
From: D from BC on 20 Apr 2010 21:10 In article <xcCdnaAV2ZFXsVPWnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, regor(a)midwest.net says... > Maybe you will take comfort in the fact that Atheist are winning, the > National day of Prayer has been declared unconstitutional. > > RogerN > National day of Prayer is a trojan. Looks harmless but it's aim is to promote, strengthen, convert, indoctrinate, increase social division and create unfairness to other religions or lack of religion and makes a government seem theocratic. National prayer day makes the hint that Christian ideas don't sell themselves. Christianity has to be pumped up by national days, super churches and evangelists and weekly visits to church.. It's like there's a problem believing in this stuff. There will never be a national atheist day. The atheists don't want a national atheist day. A National atheists day is silly like a YOu're-Not-A-Dentist Day. Special days have to stop.. Everyday with be a special day and then special days will be replaced by other special days. Fathers day. Mothers day. Daughter day? Son day? Auntie day? 1st cousin day? -- D from BC British Columbia
From: Jon Kirwan on 20 Apr 2010 22:25
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:37:56 -0500, "RogerN" <regor(a)midwest.net> wrote: >"Jon Kirwan" <jonk(a)infinitefactors.org> wrote in message >news:ig2ss551inmdqnvtlbv6cu4rrp2p3pmb0q(a)4ax.com... >> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 05:51:40 -0500, "RogerN" >> <regor(a)midwest.net> wrote: >> >>><snip> >>>On Earth there are good places to live and bad places to live, some have >>>it >>>pretty good here on Earth while others are not so fortunate. >> >> In other words, one cannot tell there are Christians here at >> all. When Jesus was around, he was basically preaching to >> give away all you own to the poor and follow him. At that >> time, there were no Christians at all and the religious >> leaders had a great deal of perks (like being able to eat >> from the fields on Sunday, for example) and this was a "new >> idea." Today, religious leaders still drive around in >> expensive, chauffeured cars and live in personal comfort and >> wealth, and no one much gives away everything they have to >> the poor to follow Jesus. The only difference is that there >> is a world full of people calling themselves Christians today >> and there were roughly zero back then. Nothing has changed, >> though. You can't tell there is any difference at all, for >> all the CINOs "Christians in name only" that exist now. > > I agree with you Jon, in this country "Christians" are so > comfortable that the price of being a "believer" is about > zero. Did you read Illie's book that I gave a link to? He > paid a price for being a believer, and it appears that God > rewarded him. Perhaps extraordinary faith requires > extraordinary acts of God. Read Matthew 6:1-8, or so, and then Matthew 6:19-20, and then Matthew 6:25-end. And then think hard and closely about them. One does not (and should not) expect rewards here on Earth. And if you do receive them, they should be given away to the poor, not retained. Otherwise, you do not follow Jesus nearly as well as you should. And as Jesus says, if you receive your rewards here, why should you imagine that God will provide more, later on. You've already been paid on Earth, so that gets you nothing in Heaven. >>>Couldn't Hell be similar as far as worse and better areas? >> >> Couldn't Valhalla be similar as far as worse and better >> areas? What about samsara from some Buddhist traditions? >> Might they be similar as far as worse and better areas? >> >> Don't you see this for the sheer argument from ignorance and >> projection that it is? >> >> Jon > > The Bible clearly teaches different degrees of reward in > Heaven and different degrees of punishment in Hell. I was speaking from the point of view of your response to DfromBC! You wrote: >: On Earth there are good places to live and bad places to >: live, some have it pretty good here on Earth while others >: are not so fortunate. Couldn't Hell be similar as far as >: worse and better areas? I was hard for me to know exactly what part of DfromBC you were addressing (he wrote a nice, long diatribe) and you placed your response at the bottom of it all. But I took your meaning to be about the latter part (last paragraph or so) that he wrote, providing a very vague argument based upon nothing else than ignorance about the subject. >I don't understand how that is an argument from ignorance. Because it _is_ an argument that is based upon a lack of knowledge. When you write, "it might be this, or it might be that" you are basically saying you don't know one way or another but that given your ignorance about the whole idea it might be A, or B, or who knows what else? In other words, more simply expressed, an argument from ignorance. >From what I have heard, Paradise, Abraham's bosom, >is in Hades, aka Hell. Okay. This is _one_ piece of evidence. Which is more than you offered before. Not that it is good evidence, being hearsay and not even very good hearsay, at that. >So if paradise is in Hell, There is a HUGE _if_ here. You've only suggested something from the least of hearsay (no indications where you heard it, what made you think it was worth listening to, etc.) which I take to mean you _might_ want someone else to at least consider the idea but aren't actually trying to state it as factual... and then you have moved beyond that vague, weak statement to now assuming it into the record as fact. Don't you see just how slippery this kind of argument is? Barely stating something in a very weak way and then moving on as though it were established fact? > and the lake of fire is in Hell, why is it a stretch to > believe there can be something in between. I have heard of > Hell described and a lake of fire and also as a 2nd death, > and also as eternal separation from God. To me, a lake of > fire sounds worse than what I think of as death, just an > eternal non-existence. It's just a pile of ifs and heard-ofs and to-me's. Not an argument. It does talk a little about your state of mind, though, and your lack of skills at self-criticism. I think I posted this earlier. But it will help get your mind in gear. http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm > Maybe you will take comfort in the fact that Atheist are > winning, the National day of Prayer has been declared > unconstitutional. I completely disagree that atheists are winning. Christians own the place, literally and figuratively. We've had that debate before. The US Supreme Court has consistently provided more than a little elbow room for Christians, too. I've documented a number of those cases in this group, as well, illustrating just how much and how far they have gone above and beyond the call of duty here. Before we discuss this case, though, I insist that you read the actual decision. It can be found here: http://www.wiwd.uscourts.gov/assets/pdf/FFRF_v_Obama_Order.pdf Once you tell me you have read it from top to bottom, as I have, we can discuss the details. Otherwise, I will consider your opinion ignorant, wrong, and simply not worth debating. You _are_ wrong in saying that the atheists are winning and that any single decision proves the case, including this one. But until you've educated yourself, I don't know where to go with you. Read, get back to me. Jon |