.

Seun:
Moral thinking has evolved over time. In bible times, slavery was deemed to be acceptable, which is why it was not condemned even in the new testament. (Looking at a woman's boobies? Sin! Enslaving your fellow man? That's ok). But nowadays, most people see slavery as a serious and unacceptable crime against humanity. Our moral thinking on slavery has evolved.

I think Morality is a result of people thinking about what kind of society they'd rather live in.

Murder is considered morally wrong because no one wants to live in a world where anyone you meet can kill you at anytime without consequences. You cant make long term plans to improve your life if you know you could be killed at any time. As a result, societies that forbid murder and punish murderers harshly have thrived.

Adultery is considered morally wrong because no man wants to devote his life to the care of a woman's children if he is not sure that the children belong to him. Societies that enforce marital faithfulness by punishing adultery have thrived because men in such societies are motivated to participate in the care and nurturing of children.

The problem with bible-based morality is that the bible's morality is 2,000 years old. People who insist on basing their morality on ancient books can't evolve their morality very much, despite the fact that we know a lot of things that the writers of the such books didn't know, which should enable us to make better decisions about what should be considered morally wrong.

WORD !!

Don't you just love how this beloved gentleman succintly and efficiently hammer one of those gods who had been holding mankind down in bronze-age mentalities.

cyrexx: LOL,

Why did I fall for your dubious tricks this morning , read again thru my post and please dont miquote (actually i think its called quote-mine) me, thats low of you.

You combed thru all my posts ignoring most of what I said, only to select few of my words that you dwell on to deliberately miscostrue my entire message.

Actually I don't think I misconstrued your statements. I'm just saying that you didn't really say anything as regards the question I asked.

For instance let us look at the example you said I ignored in order to quote-mine you

For instance you ignore this statement:

"Just see atheism, if you will, as a cure and recovery from the mental virus called religion, christianity in my own case. Atheism is just a realisation of the truth that religion and the God(s) of those religions are all man-made control mechanism. It is man that wrote the holy books and it is men like you who speak for god. Let god speak to us for once and we will know that christianity or islam or any other religion is NOT man-made."

All you have said here is basically I used to believe X but now I believe Y. What you haven't shown are the advantages of believing Y as opposed to believing X. You claim Y is better than X but you give no reasons other than calling X unfavourable names.

You just showed your true colours. You want to change the direction of the thread and start making me to defend what i dont have to defend.

By the way, the emphasis of that my misconstrued quote above is NOT on "advantageous" but on "general".

There is no general.... Never mind. You will still look for something else again to quote-mine

Perhaps you should list a few specific advantages then because you didn't list any either.

Before we continue, I will demand you to

1. Read entirely thru my post and comment on major points i raised instead of searching for some words you thought you can use to discredit my entire post.

Perhaps you should make the effort to articulate your points properly or at least explain them when they have been questioned instead of accusing me of quote-mining because I can't magically read your mind and know what meaning you were trying to pass across.

2. explain how you came to atheism and satanism and how you come to realise that christianity is better than other religions

Ok I'll give you a very brief run through and perhaps this answer will show you what I am expecting of you.

How I came to be an atheist: I was a "nominal christian" growing up (My parents got born again when I was about 7 years old) and gradually I began to have doubts about what I had been raised to believe. As I grew, I saw hypocrisy in church; Pastors literally fighting over money, people speaking in tongues and stealing bibles in church, I even saw a female pastor who was teaching us about purity then secretly kissing and smooching with another guy in church who was not her husband. I think one of the things that "broke the camels back" for me was when I was told to "have faith" and pray for my sick uncle. I "stirred up my faith" and prayed for him that morning and by evening he died. As you can imagine, I was hurt. That was not the only event but many other things happened as well but eventually I lost my belief in God. I promptly began to challenge people on His existence and threw at them every question I could.

Now there is something that comes with atheism which is the sense of liberation from any moral obligations placed on you by your religion. For instance if your religion forbids drinking alcohol and you denounce it, suddenly there is no reason not to drink alcohol. The same goes for every moral obligation and all the things you previously wouldn't do because you were afraid of what God will do to you if you did. Since you are no longer "scared of God" anymore, you find yourself defining what is right and wrong for yourself. For instance you might begin to ask questions like "what is really wrong with lying anyway?" or "what is really wrong with adultery?" and so on and so forth. Eventually, you find out that you are having to justify your actions based on you and yourself alone.
The next thing that follows is that you begin to observe other people and you find out (or so it seemed to me at the time) that they too are more or less doing the same thing including (and especially) the religious ones who to me only used God as a means of justifying their actions to themselves. The hypocrisy of so-called Christians did not help matters either and was further proof to me that people only adopted a moral cloak when it suited them or when they wanted you to do something but readily threw their moral values out of the window when they were pushed to the wall or when they just wanted to have fun. As far as I was concerned, moral values were just a thing of convenience. For instance we might say it is wrong to kill another human being but if there was a famine, we would happily go hunting humans to kill and eat.
As far as I was concerned, there was no God, no spirits, no souls, nothing but organized atoms trying to survive and enjoy life. For me, anything you did to survive was justified and if for some reason I did not survive or someone else killed me to survive then that's just too bad. I did not owe anyone anything and no one owed me anything.
I was alive to stay alive as much as possible and to enjoy it as much as I could and everyone else should do the same with their lives. If being nice helped me get what I want, I would be nice, if being nasty served my purposes better, then I would be nasty. I actually once argued during the time after 9/11 when the Americans were hunting Osama bin Laden that what Osama did wasn't necessarily evil and assuming the Arabs had prevailed, 50-100 years from now we would be singing his praises as our hero who saved the world from the evil oppressors of the West. My argument was that it is the person that wins the war that writes history and forms thought and that our thoughts were also formed by those who won previous wars. No ideology was necessarily better than the other, what matters is who won the war and who gets to educate the next generation.
Now the problem with this was that this was not how I acted. I remember when I fell in love with my first girlfriend, I couldn't explain why I just wanted to do things for her even when it inconvenienced me greatly. If it was true that all we lived for was personal survival, then why should I sacrifice for someone else and actually enjoy it and even want to sacrifice more.
I'll give you an instance; Incidentally, the girl I was dating was a pastor's daughter and I found her "christianity" amusing so I took a liking to her. She was a virgin and believed she should stay celibate until marriage. Obviously I didn't share such beliefs and I knew I could easily manipulate her into sleeping with me (and if I had tempted her properly, she would have happily fallen) but for some strange reason I didn't want to. I wanted to respect her wishes and let her come around in her own time and this bothered me because here I was depriving myself of pleasure in order to respect someone else who was depriving herself of pleasure because of beliefs that I don't respect. Indirectly I was acknowledging the same God I claimed didn't exist. Anyway, as the relationship went on, things went south and we eventually broke up I concluded that love was madness anyway and promptly went back to bashing Christians in Christian fellowships. One method I liked to use (and still love to use) in argument was the Socratic method i.e. I would seat back and ask question after question until the fellowship leader usually contradicted his/herself. Sound familiar?

How I became a satanist: So as I was saying, I held onto the premise that morality is a man-made concept and there is really no purpose to life. I was browsing the internet one day aimlessly jumping from site to site when I came across Anton LaVey and read a bit of his biography and how he lost his faith and moved on to founding the church of Satan. I found myself a copy of the satanic bible and began to read it. Basically, it's philosophy agreed with mine because it also denied all good and evil and maintained that man is his own redeemer and should be free to do what he liked. I can't tell you how much I enjoyed the book. For me the book was the truth and the cure for the mental shackles of religion. It didn't even bother me that the book supported human sacrifice and how to destroy another human being - well, they deserved it for trying to hamper my survival I didn't see anything different between it and those praying in church for their enemies to die (the devil has many flavours doesn't he now?). Incidentally the satanic bible doesn't support killing babies because babies are "pure". . .but then I guess that's the limit of Anton LaVey's moral madness thankfully because if we follow his logic properly, there really shouldn't be any such thing as purity baby or not, we are merely an arrangement of atoms that can see ourselves nothing more. I lived with this philosophy for a little less than a year but it was becoming harder and harder to justify to myself (trust me nonsense of satanism takes some real nerves of steel to truly internalize) so around that same time, I began to look at new age philosophies which are really a softcore version of atheistic satanism only that they try to give a reason for morality by mixing almost every religion they can lay their hands on and then pry on our limited knowledge of quantum physics to try and tell you that you are really God but that everyone is God too so you don't have to hurt someone else because you are all one. I tried to believe that nonsense for a while but after trying to meditate a few times, I wrote it off because to me if we were all one entity in the end, it wouldn't really matter what we did to each other because nothing we do can stop us from being one consciousness anyway. . . .so back to square one. There is really no meaning or purpose to existence

How I found Christ: As usual, I was still going to fellowships to bash my "victims". In fact I was in one such fellowship when I started asking "annoying" questions as usual and watching them try to give answers. It was so much fun for me. I was enjoying myself and the fellowship leader was feeling really uncomfortable and humiliated so she said to me "I don't know all the answers, why don't you go and ask God?" I laughingly took her up on her challenge. I had won. I was going to pray and prove that God isn't real after all.
After the fellowship that evening, I went home and I asked God "if you are real, show yourself to me". This was one prayer I prayed where for once I was honestly expecting an answer. God did not answer me that day so I went on living my life. A few weeks later, I was aimlessly browsing again and came upon a short story by Leo Tolstoy called "Ivan The Fool". Now it isn't a wonderful piece of philosophical thinking, it is just a simple story about a man called Ivan and his foolishness. He would never fight back, never insist on his rights, All he did wanted was to be able to work on his little farm while the rest of the world fought amongst themselves. He was foolish an naive as far as everyone was concerned but in the end he emerged victorious because while the rest of the world struggled and fought for possessions, they eventually consumed each other and destroyed themselves in the process while Ivan and the rest of the foolish people stayed on in their simplicity.
As I read this tale, something wonderful happened; I saw Christ, I began to see in Ivan what it meant to be a Christian. I saw his simplicity, his humility, his selflessness and how because the glitters of the world had no attraction for him, he wasn't tempted and didn't have to fight for things everyone was killing themselves over. I began to understand what Jesus meant when he said "don't worry about what to eat or what to wear....". There was a part in the story when soldiers came to fight against the City of Fools but the foolish people wouldn't fight back because they were foolish and so while the soldiers killed them, they just sat on the ground and cried. The soldiers couldn't fight anymore because their consciences pricked them and so they retreated. I began to see what Jesus meant when he said "if someone snatches your shirt from you, give him your coat too...".
As I began to understand what Christ's message was all about, I immediately saw myself for exactly what I was: An evil, proud selfish self-righteous ruthlessly cruel tyrant incapable of love. Full of fear and suspicion of everyone else, incapable of trust, full of greed and wanting to have everything with no regard for who got hurt in the process. And I had rationalized it as life has no meaning so I create mine anyway I liked. I saw for the first time how despicable and full of sin I was, I began to see how dirty and shameful my heart was and it broke me. Sitting there in my room, I knelt down and bowed my head to the ground and begged God for forgiveness. The Holy Spirit had convicted me of my sins. Not very long after that I was baptized in the Holy Ghost which was another experience that clinched it for me. I knew I had become His. I had given my life to Christ forever. My sins were forgiven. I am free.
I later began to study the bible for myself and the more I read about Jesus Christ, the more I loved him. I began to ask question after question and the more I asked, the more it seemed that whenever I was bothered about a question, God directed me to a verse that sorted it out for me. I can't really explain how but usually, in my next devotion I will see the answer to what I seek. I began to read the bible and it was as if almost every story I read in the bible pointed straight to Christ. Until this day, I can't explain to you the joy I feel when I read scripture. I have found the Truth and His name is Jesus Christ.



“There is a God shaped vacuum in the heart of every man which cannot be filled by any created thing, but only by God, the Creator, made known through Jesus.”

― Blaise Pascal



Now the above is a brief history of how I came to know the truth. I don't need you to give me your history but the following is sort of what I need from you:

Advantages of following Christ over being an Atheist:

1. As a follower of Christ, I have a purpose for living. My life has a meaning. As an atheist life has no meaning, it is just a bunch of random coincidences.

2. As a follower of Christ, I can love my neighbour and sacrifice for him. As an atheist, there is no need to love you can choose to love or hate if you like.

3. As a follower of Christ, other people have value because Christ died for them. As an atheist, man has no real value. He has no soul only a bunch of atoms.

4. As a follower of Christ, I don't have the emptyness that comes with a life of purposelessness. As an atheist, purposelessness and meaninglessness is the reality I live with

5. As a follower of Christ, marriage is sacred. If I chose a wife, I must be faithful to her and love her until we both pass away. As an atheist, there is nothing really sacred about marriage and there is no real reason to stay faithful.

6. As a follower of Christ, I cannot be cruel to my neighbour or have evil thoughts toward him because Christ forbids it. As an atheist, cruelty is my choice. If I can get away with it why not?

7. As a follower of Christ, I forgive when I have been offended. As an atheist, there is no real reason to forgive. I can exact vengeance if I wanted to.

8. As a follower of Christ, I do not do good deeds to please people or show off my goodness but to please God, As an atheist, the only way to really justify goodness is if it gives me some personal gratification.

9. As a follower of Christ, I can live without the so-called good things of life. No bait can be used to tempt me into evil. As an atheist, there is nothing beyond this life and no one to be accountable to so there is every reason to grab as much pleasure as you can manage.

10. The best part is that as a follower of Christ, it is not my good works that gets me to Heaven, I don't have to impress God. I do not do good because I am forced to or because I am afraid of hell (I have already been saved from it) but because I am grateful to the one who loved me so much that He took the punishment for my sins so I honor Him. As an atheist, there is really no good and evil anyway, everyone is free to do what he likes and can justify to himself. If cruelty works for you just do it. the worst that will happen is that you die.




I have now fully satisfied your requests. Now please tell me exactly why atheism over christianity. I have given you 10 advantages of following Christ over being an atheist. I won't ask that much from you. I will assume that you know what it means to follow Christ in truth but you chose atheism instead.

All you have to do now my dear Cyrexx, is to give me only 5 advantages of being an atheist over following Christ. I await your list.

.

You don't have to lie that you were an atheist and try to give a FALSE idea of what atheism is to make your points. . .

Mr_Anony:
Now there is something that comes with atheism which is the sense of liberation from any moral obligations placed on you by your religion. For instance if your religion forbids drinking alcohol and you denounce it, suddenly there is no reason not to drink alcohol.

False, I personally do not drink alcohol because I consider drinking and getting drunk as something that is foolish. . .

The same goes for every moral obligation and all the things you previously wouldn't do because you were afraid of what God will do to you if you did. Since you are no longer "scared of God" anymore, you find yourself defining what is right and wrong for yourself. For instance you might begin to ask questions like "what is really wrong with lying anyway?" or "what is really wrong with adultery?" and so on and so forth. Eventually, you find out that you are having to justify your actions based on you and yourself alone.

You said you were an atheist and thought this way right?. . .So tell me how many people did you kill when you became an atheist?. . .How many girls did you rapeeee? how many times did you meet your neighbours wife and asked her our?. . .How many people did you defraud?. . .How many cars did you steal? how many shops did you rob? how many time s did you beat up your mum? how many married women did you sleep with because you stop fearing god and believed every thing was based on your self alone. . .Pls tell me how many people did you kill and how much drugs did you do because you believed your actions are based on you and yourself alone. . .

The next thing that follows is that you begin to observe other people and you find out (or so it seemed to me at the time) that they too are more or less doing the same thing including (and especially) the religious ones who to me only used God as a means of justifying their actions to themselves. The hypocrisy of so-called Christians did not help matters either and was further proof to me that people only adopted a moral cloak when it suited them or when they wanted you to do something but readily threw their moral values out of the window when they were pushed to the wall or when they just wanted to have fun. As far as I was concerned, moral values were just a thing of convenience. For instance we might say it is wrong to kill another human being but if there was a famine, we would happily go hunting humans to kill and eat.

How many atheist societies do this?. . .I live in Denmark, and I am yet to interact with a young Danish adult between the ages of 21-25 that believes in god, I am very serious, I am yet to see, I am not saying they don't exist but I am yet to interact with one. .But they do not think that moral values are a thing of convenience as you are trying to paint it. . .If all atheist all believe that moral values are a thing of convenience as you claim. . then why is there less crime and murder in Denmark(highly atheistic) compared to Nigeria which is the second most religious nation on earth?. . .

As far as I was concerned, there was no God, no spirits, no souls, nothing but organized atoms trying to survive and enjoy life. For me, anything you did to survive was justified and if for some reason I did not survive or someone else killed me to survive then that's just too bad. I did not owe anyone anything and no one owed me anything.

Again, how many people did you kill when you were an atheist and reasoned like this?. . .How many times did you beat up your mum?. . .How many times did you cheat your friends, how many shooting sprees were you involved in?. . .Since no one owned you, how many times did you enter your neighbours house and rapeeeee his kids?. . .

I was alive to stay alive as much as possible and to enjoy it as much as I could and everyone else should do the same with their lives. If being nice helped me get what I want, I would be nice, if being nasty served my purposes better, then I would be nasty. I actually once argued during the time after 9/11 when the Americans were hunting Osama bin Laden that what Osama did wasn't necessarily evil and assuming the Arabs had prevailed, 50-100 years from now we would be singing his praises as our hero who saved the world from the evil oppressors of the West. My argument was that it is the person that wins the war that writes history and forms thought and that our thoughts were also formed by those who won previous wars. No ideology was necessarily better than the other, what matters is who won the war and who gets to educate the next generation.
Now the problem with this was that this was not how I acted. I remember when I fell in love with my first girlfriend, I couldn't explain why I just wanted to do things for her even when it inconvenienced me greatly. If it was true that all we lived for was personal survival, then why should I sacrifice for someone else and actually enjoy it and even want to sacrifice more.

You just keep begging the question in a very dishonest way. . . Firstly, lack of belief in god which is what atheism is does NOT say we live ONLY for personal survival. . .if the nonsense you are trying to imply is true then why is it that some atheist have shown more love and sacrifice to others more than religious some people? No evidence what so ever to show that atheist are more evil or that christians show more love to others than atheist. . .This fact shows that you are asking the wrong question. . .Some christians through their behaviour see life as a personal survival same with some atheist, to claim that atheism means life is a personal survival is to tell lies. . .

I'll give you an instance; Incidentally, the girl I was dating was a pastor's daughter and I found her "christianity" amusing so I took a liking to her. She was a virgin and believed she should stay celibate until marriage. Obviously I didn't share such beliefs and I knew I could easily manipulate her into sleeping with me (and if I had tempted her properly, she would have happily fallen) but for some strange reason I didn't want to. I wanted to respect her wishes and let her come around in her own time and this bothered me because here I was depriving myself of pleasure in order to respect someone else who was depriving herself of pleasure because of beliefs that I don't respect. Indirectly I was acknowledging the same God I claimed didn't exist. Anyway, as the relationship went on, things went south and we eventually broke up I[b] concluded that love was madness anyway[/b] and promptly went back to bashing Christians in Christian fellowships. One method I liked to use (and still love to use) in argument was the Socratic method i.e. I would seat back and ask question after question until the fellowship leader usually contradicted his/herself. Sound familiar?

Since love was madness as you thought, how many whoressss did you go about sleeping with?. . .How many girls did you rappppeeee because you believed love was madness. . .How many times did you rapeeee your sister to satisfy your sexual urge because you believed life was all about survival and you were not responsible for anything and not answerable to any body?. . .

Seun:
Moral thinking has evolved over time. In bible times, slavery was deemed to be acceptable, which is why it was not condemned even in the new testament.

this is out of context rationalisation.

1. What the new testament refers to as "slave" is not what your conventional "slavery" entails but rather a man with a body of workers or worker.

2. A manager incharge of the masters property, or having oversight over his masters belonging.

3. Hired labourers.

4. The christians that embraces christianity out of their free will were also refered to as "slaves of the lord"

5. Even the overseers or elders in the christian church was refered to as a "slave"

6. Slaves in the NT were not individuals under servitude of compulsion and thrait and chains for labour.

Your application and use of the word "slave" in the secular context that connotes torture and force labour and applying it to the bible is wrong and a strawman or an argument from ignorance at best.

Unless you wish to tell me that :

1. being a hired workman is wrong.

2. An NGO/voluntary service workers are "slave"

3. An estate manager is a "slave"

4. Salaried workers are "slaves"

5. That working under some other persons vineyard (company) for payment/salary is slavery.

If those are not slavery, then you are abusing the bible context of the use of the word "slave".

1. The person that the command was given to was a christian and we know the laws given to christians which does not allow for a force acquisition of properties that are not his lawfully neither are they allowed to engage in wars in the first century christianity.

2. The christian slave was told that he was a free man, but was advised to be exemplary in conduct as to bring honor to his christian calling, this in turn can make it possible for the conversion of his master into christianity.

3. Christianity was geared toward conversion of people to christ irrespective of status and class, as such it was package in such a way it will be attractive to people of all divides.

4. Christianity was not to give room to a certain group of people to reject the message preventing them from being "saved" for christ.
Being saved for christ was paramount and to that end, it focuses on achieving its set objective of ensuring that both master and "slave" can serve christ together without tension.

5. The aim of christianity is getting people ready for the kingdom of God, it is wrong and short sighted to set a contrary yard stick for christianity and use it to judge christian/NT
statement.

Your aims and bible aims are at divergent, if christianity was to loose its focus and start chasing shadows then it will have been a purposeless setup that will have created a destructive/distraction that will have prevented certain kind of people from embracing it(slave/master)

but rather, it positive for peaceful coexisnce as opposed to rebellion.(your projection)

That you dont know the aim of christianity hence your statement above shows your short sightedness in this matter and shows you are not even qualified to criticise it since you lack the full picture.

Seun:
(Looking at a woman's boobies? Sin! Enslaving your fellow man? That's ok).

see above.

Seun:
The problem with bible-based morality is that the bible's morality is 2,000 years old. People who insist on basing their morality on ancient books can't evolve their morality very much, despite the fact that we know a lot of things that the writers of those ancient books didn't know, which should enable us to make better decisions about what should be considered morally wrong.

if i should say you dont know the essence of christianity and you dont have the full gist of the bible, i will be justified.

For you to be able to pass a judgement that is valid it should be from an informed opinion which you dont have.

At best what you are doing is giving credence to your rationality that has nothing to do with the bible and its message and set objectives which is to accomodate all men in preparation for the kingdom of God

Dont argue from.............
The bible christian NT does not do what you are accusing it.

You guys are grasping at straws to seek relevance for atheism.
Peace

mazaje: You don't have to lie that you were an atheist and try to give a FALSE idea of what atheism is to make your points. . .



False, I personally do not drink alcohol because I consider drinking and getting drunk as something that is foolish. . .




You said you were an atheist and thought this way right?. . .So tell me how many people did you kill when you became an atheist?. . .How many girls did you rapeeee? how many times did you meet your neighbours wife and asked her our?. . .How many people did you defraud?. . .How many cars did you steal? how many shops did you rob? how many time s did you beat up your mum? how many married women did you sleep with because you stop fearing god and believed every thing was based on your self alone. . .Pls tell me how many people did you kill and how much drugs did you do because you believed your actions are based on you and yourself alone. . .



How many atheist societies do this?. . .I live in Denmark, and I am yet to interact with a young Danish adult between the ages of 21-25 that believes in god, I am very serious, I am yet to see, I am not saying they don't exist but I am yet to interact with one. .But they do not think that moral values are a thing of convenience as you are trying to paint it. . .If all atheist all believe that moral values are a thing of convenience as you claim. . then why is there less crime and murder in Denmark(highly atheistic) compared to Nigeria which is the second most religious nation on earth?. . .




Again, how many people did you kill when you were an atheist and reasoned like this?. . .How many times did you beat up your mum?. . .How many times did you cheat your friends, how many shooting sprees were you involved in?. . .Since no one owned you, how many times did you enter your neighbours house and rape his kids?. . .



You just keep begging the question in a very dishonest way. . . Firstly, lack of belief in god which is what atheism is does NOT say we live ONLY for personal survival. . .if the nonsense you are trying to imply is true then why is it that some atheist have shown more love and sacrifice to others more than religious some people? No evidence what so ever to show that atheist are more evil or that christians show more love to others than atheist. . .This fact shows that you are asking the wrong question. . .Some christians through their behaviour see life as a personal survival same with some atheist, to claim that atheism means life is a personal survival is to tell lies. . .




Since love was madness as you thought, how many whoressss did you go about sleeping with?. . .How many girls did you rappppeeee because you believed love was madness. . .How many times did you rapeeee your sister to satisfy your sexual urge because you believed life was all about survival and you were not responsible for anything and not answerable to any body?. . .

I think you should read Cyrexx on quote mining.

Mr_Anony:
I think you should read Cyrexx on quote mining.

Quote mining?


Wow.....just wow.....he quoted you in clear context.


Anonyism 101; when somebody uses a strong argument against you, falsely project it back at them

Logicboy03:


Quote mining?


Wow.....just wow.....he quoted you in clear context.


Anonyism 101; when somebody uses a strong argument against you, falsely project it back at them

I was shocked when I read his reply. . .WOW!!!

mazaje:

I was shocked when I read his reply. . .WOW!!!

I wasnt surprised. I have experienced lots of Anonyism firsthand!


He is as dubious as Dinesh D'souza

Logicboy03:


I wasnt surprised. I have experienced lots of Anonyism firsthand!


He is as dubious as Dinesh D'souza

No be small thing. . .Dinesh D'souza, William Craig, Garry Habermas, Anony etc. . .They are all the same. . .There is a debate between William Craig and Eddy Tabash on morality. . .Look it up if you can. . . .You will be shocked. . . William Craig just got tired and didn't know how to respond to tabash, he ended up saying that some of the old testament morality were not set by god. . .he said some of the things the people wrote down did not come from god, they felt god told them but he believed they got it wrongly and god did not tell them such things. . . . . .Am very serious. .Pls look it up. . .

[quote author=mazaje]

No be small thing. . .Dinesh D'souza, William Craig, Garry Habermas, Anony etc. . .They are all the same. . .There is a debate between William Craig and Eddy Tabash on morality. . .Look it up if you can. . . .You will be shocked. . . William Craig just got tired and didn't know how to respond to tabash, he ended up saying that some of the old testament morality were not set by god. . .he said some of the things the people wrote down did not come from god, they felt god told thewm but he believed they got it wrongly and god did not tell them such thing. . . . . .Am very serious. .Pls look it up. . .[/quote


I have seen that debate; it was wonderful. People have reviewed it a lot. Dinesh similarly avoided taking on Sam Harris points on old testament and religious morlaity in the debate.


These guys are good at debating by remixing. All one needs to do is always used the flaws in their argument against them. Hitchens was good at that. He always pointed out the lie that Hitler was an atheist and that theists result to sidestepping religious evil to charity!

@truthislight:
You have claimed that a "slave" in the new testament is more-or-less a hired labourer or employee rather than a piece of property to be bought and sold and forced to do whatever his/her owner wants him to do. Can you explain the following bible verses, then?

"Because the patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, they sold him as a slave into Egypt. But God was with him" - Acts 7:9
They sold him into ... Hired labor? Employment? How does a person get sold into a voluntary job?

"You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings." - 1 Corinthians 7:23
If a slave is simply a hired labourer or servant, why is it bad to become a slave? Is it wrong for a Christian to be employed?

"We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?” - John 8:33
What does "we have never been slaves" mean. Does it mean they had never been employed? And why are they implying that a person who needs to be freed must be a slave? If slaves in the new testament are voluntary labourers, why do they need to be "set free"?

Logicboy03: [/quote]

I have seen that debate; it was wonderful. People have reviewed it a lot. Dinesh similarly avoided taking on Sam Harris points on old testament and religious morlaity in the debate.


These guys are good at debating by remixing. All one needs to do is always used the flaws in their argument against them. Hitchens was good at that. He always pointed out the lie that Hitler was an atheist and that theists result to sidestepping religious evil to charity!

They keep lying all the time. . .Example anony says when he was an atheist he felt he was not accountable to any body so he believed he could do anything because everything depended on him alone. . .He should tell us how many women he rapeed to satisfy his sexualll desires for example since he was not accountable to any body and every thing depended on him. . .

mazaje:

I have seen that debate; it was wonderful. People have reviewed it a lot. Dinesh similarly avoided taking on Sam Harris points on old testament and religious morlaity in the debate.


These guys are good at debating by remixing. All one needs to do is always used the flaws in their argument against them. Hitchens was good at that. He always pointed out the lie that Hitler was an atheist and that theists result to sidestepping religious evil to charity!

They keep lying all the time. . .Example anony says when he was an atheist he felt he was not accountable to any body so he believed he could do anything because everything depended on him alone. . .He should tell us how many women he rapeed to satisfy his sexualll desires for example since he was not accountable to any body and every thing depended on him. . .

Anony told me he was an atheist in the past when we met. I could only laugh when he said that it atheism automatically leads to Satanism.


Havent seen Dawkins kneeling down to recieve the dark lord have you?

Logicboy03:




Anony told me he was an atheist in the past when we met. I could only laugh when he said that it atheism automatically leads to Satanism.


Havent seen Dawkins kneeling down to recieve the dark lord have you?

He is obviously lying, he was never an atheist. . .An atheist can never say things like "what is really wrong with lying anyway?" or "what is really wrong with adultery?". . . .Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god. . .It is not a moral philosophy etc. . .To claim that you are an atheist and claim that it lead you to satanism or that it leads to satanism is not know what you are talking about. . .He is just LYING as usual. . .In this case he is telling sweet lies for Jesus. . .

mazaje:

He is obviously lying, he was never an atheist. . .An atheist can never say things like "what is really wrong with lying anyway?" or "what is really wrong with adultery?". . . .Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god. . .It is not a moral philosophy etc. . .To claim that you are an atheist and claim that it lead you to satanism or that it leads to satanism is not know what you are talking about. . .He is just LYING as usual. . .In this case he is telling sweet lies for Jesus. . .

That's not the worst part. He forgot that Satanism has a theistic side where Satan is taken as a God.


Anony was saying atheism leads to theism!

mazaje:
They keep lying all the time. . .Example anony says when he was an atheist he felt he was not accountable to any body so he believed he could do anything because everything depended on him alone. . .He should tell us how many women he rapeed to satisfy his sexualll desires for example since he is not accountable to any body and every thing depended on him. . .

I never said I raped anybody. I said my philosophy was that I didn't see rape as evil and I would not have felt guilty if I forced myself upon someone. You are misrepresenting my statements as usual. How does this mean that therefore I must have to rape someone in order to prove a point?

For instance, you probably don't consider homosexuality to be evil. And you probably believe you are free to engage in it if you want to and you don't owe anyone any apology for it. Does this therefore automatically mean that for you to hold such a veiw you must show us all the men you have had intercourse with?

Should I now accuse you of lying? Why are you accusing me falsely?

Logicboy03:
That's not the worst part. He forgot that Satanism has a theistic side where Satan is taken as a God.


Anony was saying atheism leads to theism!

Crap logic as usual

Mr_Anony:
I never said I raped anybody. I said my philosophy was that I didn't see rape as evil and I would not have felt guilty if I forced myself upon someone. You are misrepresenting my statements as usual. How does this mean that therefore I must have to rape someone in order to prove a point?

Lord of the remix. You tied that philosophy to atheism rather than yourself. That is the problem

Mr_Anony:
For instance, you probably don't consider homosexuality to be evil. And you probably believe you are free to engage in it if you want to and you don't owe anyone any apology for it. Does this therefore automatically mean that for you to hold such a veiw you must show us all the men you have had intercourse with?

Should I now accuse you of lying? Why are you accusing me falsely?

Not all atheists support gay rights. You have no points. You tied supporting molestation to atheism rather than your poor philosophy. That is the problem

Mr_Anony:
Crap logic as usual

projection......project your failed logic on others.

Logicboy03:


projection......project your failed logic on others.

SMH

Mr_Anony: No it was never in dispute. I don't see any reason why one would insist that a person is religious if such a person is not practising his/her religion

In other words, a religious person who sins is not religious? I don't think that position stands up to any scrutiny.

Jesus said anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has committed adultery with her in his heart, which is a sin. Does that mean any straight Christian guy who comes across a picture or video of an attractive lady who is sexily dressed and has a normal biological desire for the woman is not religious? Any man watching a beauty pageant or a typical Hollywood movie, or who comes across a lady who is dressed to kill is not religious? Suppose the best Christian in Nigeria, Pastor E.A. Adeboye is preaching and in a moment of weakness he notices an skimpily dressed lady in his audience and likes what he sees, does that mean he is not religious?

What about lying? The bible says all liars shall be cast into hell, which means it's a sin. And yet, when people people like you are having heated arguments with atheists, you tend to tell some exaggerations, half-truths, and outright lies in the heat of the moment, just to defend the Lord. Does that mean you and others like you are not religious?

Maybe what you're saying is that a religious person ceases to be religious whenever he sins and then becomes religious again when he repents. That means at any point in time, there is no way of knowing who is religious and who is not religious. That makes the word essentially useless. Perhaps we should stick to the dictionary definition, eh?

From the reasons you gave, honesty is not of high moral value. The reasons you have given are reasons of convenience rather than principle. For instance, none of the reasons you gave will make a man insist on telling the truth even if he is going to get killed for telling it. If a person is only being honest because it is convenient, how can such a person be trusted to always tell the truth no matter what?

Nobody can be trusted to tell the truth no matter what. There is no way of differentiating between the rare species of "good Christian" and "good Muslims", who presumably always tell the truth, and the garden variety. If a person claims to be a Christian, or a Muslim, you have no reason to trust his/her word any more than you would trust an atheist or agnostic's words, because he/she may not be a "true Christian" or "true Muslim". So there's no reason to believe that people who claim to be religious are more trustworthy than atheists or agnostics, because there is no way of knowing for sure that they are "truly" religious.

Personally, I think telling the truth in every situation isn't necessarily a good idea. There are situations where it's arguably more moral to lie. Suppose a little Christian child is about to die, and his/her sole consolation is the hope that he/she would be going to heaven. Even as an atheist, I don't think that would be a good time to tell her the truth. If he/she asks me about heaven, I'll say "yes, it's real"

Suppose you're trying to smuggle bibles into a country where Christians are being rounded up and killed. And the customs officer at the border asks you if you're carrying any contraband. If you say yes, or refuse to answer, you will be searched, the bibles will be found and burnt, and you would be killed. Hundreds of souls that could have been saved would be lost. Would you be honest and say yes? Or say no to further the gospel?

Logicboy03:



Lord of the remix. You tied that philosophy to atheism rather than yourself. That is the problem




Not all atheists support gay rights. You have no points. You tied supporting molestation to atheism rather than your poor philosophy. That is the problem

You took the words right out of my mouth, that was why I said he was LYING when he said he was an atheist, in anony world atheism which is just a lack of belief in god equals to murder, theft and rapeeee without remorse and guilt. . .Wow, just wow. . .

una don start ... You are defending things that existed even b4 ur ancestors. You can nvr be smarter than the devil not to talk of God himself ..

mazaje:

You took the words right out of my mouth, that was why I said he was LYING when he said he was an atheist, in anony world atheism which is just a lack of belief in god equals to murder, theft and rapeeee without remorse and guilt. . .Wow, just wow. . .

There is a level of poor reasoning which I have come to expect from logicboy, but to see it coming from you is quite appalling.

Mr_Anony:
There is a level of poor reasoning which I have come to expect from logicboy, but to see it coming from you is quite appalling.

Resorting to ad hominems?


Let the butthurt flow!

Seun: @truthislight:
You have claimed that a "slave" in the new testament is more-or-less a hired labourer or employee rather than a piece of property to be bought and sold and forced to do whatever his/her owner wants him to do. Can you explain the following bible verses, then?

"Because the patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, they sold him as a slave into Egypt. But God was with him" - Acts 7:9
They sold him into ... Hired labor? Employment? How does a person get sold into a voluntary job?

"You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings." - 1 Corinthians 7:23
If a slave is simply a hired labourer or servant, why is it bad to become a slave? Is it wrong for a Christian to be employed?

"We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?” - John 8:33
What does "we have never been slaves" mean. Does it mean they had never been employed? And why are they implying that a person who needs to be freed must be a slave? If slaves in the new testament are voluntary labourers, why do they need to be "set free"?

slaves do only things that the master ask them do. In this case would U say you dont know that people can be slaves to Sin and do only its biddings.

Seun:
In other words, a religious person who sins is not religious? I don't think that position stands up to any scrutiny.

Jesus said anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has committed adultery with her in his heart, which is a sin. Does that mean any straight Christian guy who comes across a picture or video of an attractive lady who is sexily dressed and has a normal biological desire for the woman is not religious? Any man watching a beauty pageant or a typical Hollywood movie, or who comes across a lady who is dressed to kill is not religious? Suppose the best Christian in Nigeria, Pastor E.A. Adeboye is preaching and in a moment of weakness he notices an skimpily dressed lady in his audience and likes what he sees, does that mean he is not religious?

What about lying? The bible says all liars shall be cast into hell, which means it's a sin. And yet, when people people like you are having heated arguments with atheists, you tend to tell some exaggerations, half-truths, and outright lies in the heat of the moment, just to defend the Lord. Does that mean you and others like you are not religious?

Maybe what you're saying is that a religious person ceases to be religious whenever he sins and then becomes religious again when he repents. That means at any point in time, there is no way of knowing who is religious and who is not religious. That makes the word essentially useless. Perhaps we should stick to the dictionary definition, eh?


Nobody can be trusted to tell the truth no matter what. There is no way of differentiating between the rare species of "good Christian" and "good Muslims", who presumably always tell the truth, and the garden variety. If a person claims to be a Christian, or a Muslim, you have no reason trust his word any more than you would trust an atheist or agnostic because he/she may not be a "true Christian" or "true Muslim". So there's no reason to believe that people who claim to be religious are more trustworthy than atheists or agnostics, because there is no way of knowing for sure that they are "truly" religious.

Personally, I think telling the truth in every situation isn't necessarily a good idea. There are situations where it's arguably more moral to lie. Suppose a little Christian child is about to die, and his/her sole consolation is the hope that she would be going to heaven. Even as an atheist, I don't think that would be a good time to tell her the truth. If he/she asks me about heaven, I'll say "yes, it's real"

Suppose you're trying to smuggle bibles into a country where Christians are being rounded up and killed. And the customs officer at the border asks you if you're carrying any contraband. If you say yes, or refuse to answer, you will be searched, the bibles will be found and burnt, and you would be killed. Hundreds of souls that could have been saved would be lost. Would you be honest and say yes? Or say no to further the gospel?

christianity transcends religion its a way of life.

Medley:

christianity transcends religion its a way of life.

Islam, African religion, Hinduism and Buddhism; all of them transcends religion. Each of them are ways of life.

cyrexx:
Islam, African religion, Hinduism and Buddhism; all of them transcends religion. Each of them are ways of life.

Still waiting for your list

Mr_Anony:
There is a level of poor reasoning which I have come to expect from logicboy, but to see it coming from you is quite appalling.

You said things that I found very ridiculous and strange. . .

Mr_Anony:


Advantages of following Christ over being an Atheist:

1. As a follower of Christ, I have a purpose for living. My life has a meaning. As an atheist life has no meaning, it is just a bunch of random coincidences.

No, you do not have meaning. Anyone can make something up and declare it to be true, but if you can't demonstrate that it actually is true, then it doesn't actually mean anything.

However, your assumption that my life has no meaning because I do not share your belief in unsupported assertions tells me a lot about you. This can only be true if belief in god is the only thing you find meaning in, which I find really sad and causes me to pity you. I find meaning in the love of my family, the company of my friends, helping strangers and people in need, appreciating the good and bad life has to offer, contemplating the mysteries of the life and the universe, and a bunch of other stuff, but you find no meaning in that? You only find meaning in the existence of god and Jesus which you cannot even prove. , I find my life very meaningful without following christ.

2. As a follower of Christ, I can love my neighbour and sacrifice for him. As an atheist, there is no need to love you can choose to love or hate if you like.

Once again, you reveal something important about yourself. I do love other people, and am willing to go to great lengths to help other people.

You on the other hand only help others because you believe in god. For reasons I cannot fathom, you cannot help others just to help others. You can only help others for some reason connected to your belief in god. That sound ridiculous to me. . .

3. As a follower of Christ, other people have value because Christ died for them. As an atheist, man has no real value. He has no soul only a bunch of atoms.

You are only willing to help others if you believe in god, I presume because you have been threatened with eternal torture and promised eternal pleasure if you help others. Why else would you refuse to help others without your belief in god?. . .So you value people only because you believe in god, else people are completely without value to you. . .To you atheism= people without value, right?. . .Hmmmmm

4. As a follower of Christ, I don't have the emptyness that comes with a life of purposelessness. As an atheist, purposelessness and meaninglessness is the reality I live with

Again, I happen to think you are the one with not enough meaning in your life. You assume everyone who lacks belief in God has no meaning in their lives, therefore you cannot find meaning in all the things I find meaning in (family, friends, helping others, etc.) but only find meaning in the existence of god. . . I as an atheist find live very purposeful and do not require a believe in god to give it purpose. . .Family, friends, the complexity of life and people all give my life meaning and purpose. . .It is not empty at all. . .

5. As a follower of Christ, marriage is sacred. If I chose a wife, I must be faithful to her and love her until we both pass away. As an atheist, there is nothing really sacred about marriage and there is no real reason to stay faithful.

Being faithful to your spouse will make both you and your spouse happy, you will not want your spouse to be unfaithful to you as well. . .As an atheist there is everything sacred about marriage when you tell your woman that you will have only her as a wife. . .keeping your vows does NOT require any god because the pain of losing your loving wife is enough to make you stay faithful to her, besides you promised to stay with her alone and love her to the best of your ability. Of all what you have written this remains the most pointless one. . .So without god you can not keep your marital vows. . .In the united states where they take up statistics, atheist have less divorce rate than christians. . .

6. As a follower of Christ, I cannot be cruel to my neighbour or have evil thoughts toward him because Christ forbids it. As an atheist, cruelty is my choice. If I can get away with it why not?

First, the behaviour of real-life christians reveals it as false. I believe you felt as an atheist you could get away with stealing and lying to people on some cases, so how many people did you lie to, cheat and defraud without feeling any remorse because you were an atheist?. . .If what you claim were true, then when we compare industrialized nations to each other, we would find that nations with higher percentages of atheists would have more crime because according to you, a higher percentage of the population is inherently cruel and devoid of morals, yet we find exactly the opposite of that: nations with lower percentages of atheists have more crime. The evidence appears to be precisely the opposite of what your reasoning suggests should be the case.

7. As a follower of Christ, I forgive when I have been offended. As an atheist, there is no real reason to forgive. I can exact vengeance if I wanted to.

Will you forgive a man and let him walk away freely if he kills your mum, your daughter, steals all your money and rapess your wife?. . .If you say yes then you are LYING. . .Forgiveness is good if it will make you and the person involved understand each other better. . .In many cases crimes and offence just have to be punished instead of brushed aside by forgiveness. . .If I constantly keep stealing your property will you keep forgiving me because you believe in christ?. . .This is just senseless. . .

8. As a follower of Christ, I do not do good deeds to please people or show off my goodness but to please God, As an atheist, the only way to really justify goodness is if it gives me some personal gratification.

Actually, that's exactly what you do. Since you assume that no one who lacked belief in your religion could possibly do good deeds, we can conclude that without your religion, you would not do good deeds. The only possible way I can make sense of this is if the only reason you do good deeds is because you have been promised eternal pleasure and threatened with eternal torment.There's no real difference between doing good because it makes you feel good, and doing good because you believe it pleases God and pleasing God makes you feel good.

Believe it or not, many Christians—just like me—do the right thing simply because it is the right thing, and not because they are hoping for eternal pleasure or hoping to avoid eternal torture. You can spot these christians by the lack of assumptions of moral superiority. . . .If truly you held this views as an atheist they you are just a bad person simple. . .

9. As a follower of Christ, I can live without the so-called good things of life. No bait can be used to tempt me into evil. As an atheist, there is nothing beyond this life and no one to be accountable to so there is every reason to grab as much pleasure as you can manage.

Right. Here.

Here, you admit what's going on. Here you admit the real reason you choose to behave morally. Because of "accountability". In other words, the only reason you behave morally is because you have been promised eternal pleasure and threatened with eternal torture. This is the reason you have so much difficulty imagining anyone choosing to do the right thing simply because it is the right thing. This is not proof of your nobility, but proof of your selfishness, which most people would identify as immorality rather than morality.So as a christian he have to live a miserable life, while I as an atheist can choose to seek pleasure. How convincing ...

10. The best part is that as a follower of Christ, it is not my good works that gets me to Heaven, I don't have to impress God. I do not do good because I am forced to or because I am afraid of hell (I have already been saved from it) but because I am grateful to the one who loved me so much that He took the punishment for my sins so I honor Him. As an atheist, there is really no good and evil anyway, everyone is free to do what he likes and can justify to himself. If cruelty works for you just do it. the worst that will happen is that you die.

It's just been the same ridiculous mantra the whole way through this, hasn't it?

If anything you said was true, then Christians would be demonstrably more moral than everyone else, and atheists would be complete monsters. We would spend all our days raping and murdering. Yet this is not what we see, is it? Instead we see greater crime rates in nations with more Christians in them.

You have not based your beliefs on what is likely to be true, but what makes you feel better. It seems to me that what makes you feel better is the assumption of your own moral superiority, which frees you from having to actually try to be a better person. Thankfully, the Christians I know in person do not go through life with even a fraction of the staggering arrogance displayed in this pile of faulty logic and unsupported assertions. They read and understood the meaning of the Samaritan parable in the Bible and make no assumptions of moral superiority. They know what it means to do the right thing simply because it is the right thing and not because they are afraid of eternal torture from their "loving God".

In fact, studies show that in the broad strokes, ideology makes very little difference in the moral decisions we make, which means arrogant, depraved people like you must be a minority among christians.