The debate "Jesus is the way the truth and the life" was started by
January 8, 2017, 6:25 pm.
13 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 14 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
neveralone posted 12 arguments to the agreers part.
historybuff posted 2 arguments, PoliticsAsUsual posted 6 arguments to the disagreers part.
redeemed, neveralone, dapollman, Christian, UnderdogMike, Ematio, human and 6 visitors agree.
historybuff, Radhikadhawan, PoliticsAsUsual, TheExistentialist, R3HAB, emshanley, ProfDoke and 7 visitors disagree.
it's all good. and yes a simple letter sometimes has all the power.
the power of a single misplaced letter
you know what, I will have to apologize as well as I have misread you as well. you said "I should have apologized" whereas I read "should I have apologize".
I was saying that he could of spoke but then stopped. or vice versa or he could of killed them all. who knows all were given is the book. nothing else.
does this still matter to the overall debate? I'm not throwing blame to anyone. stuff happens. then u move on
no it was more about saying I definitely should when I already did.
agreed and done.
I believe your not a troll generally, but there have been several instances when I questioned that conclusion, most notably your point #2 in the bible is absolute debate where you made the claim that not speaking is the same as speaking. that was a doozy.
I mean, you could have defended your point in other ways, like 1 of the translations was simply wrong, or its as close as we can get it but the original latin/Greek is still the unadulterated word of god. a bad arguments does not mean a wrong conclusion, we are not perfect beings. but your decision to stick to it, despite all logic and reason, is not something I can respect.
you may have not seen it and it was an honest mistake, but it was a mistake nonetheless, one that was entirely on you.
did "that is a little too much" refer to my claim that perhaps you should apoligize? I do not care if you do, but if you do something wrong should you not? especially as a Christian who's religion is based around asking forgiveness, even for sins committed by someone else eons ago. I said don't apoligize, but the whole apology point was started by you, and since you are in the wrong by your own admition, honest or not, I would apoligize.
it's honestly not a big deal. you did not insult me. I do not feel slighted. but you DID make a mistake.
ok that is a little much.
u know I'm not. we have debated before. why would I suddenly become one?
I didn't see the rest and it sounded finished that is all.
if you missed it, then once again, it is your fault, and perhaps yes, you should apoligize. (dont)
and I didn't call you a troll, I asked if you were trying to be one. I'm sure you've seen my responses to thereal. I ask no questions, he's a downright troll.
people who aren't trolls can make troll statements once in a while. people who are smart can make ignorant comments. it was more an attack at your presumptive reply before proper understanding of the post than an attack on your character. I'm sorry if it appeared as an attack.
BTW you seemed to believe you knew exactly what I was saying, you just didn't finish reading and started assuming. you also assumed I called you a troll based on your beliefs disagreeing from mine. I'd appreciate if you could quote what line made you feel that as that obviously was nowhere near true.
actually I didn't see it went on. it might have gone better if u just asked if I saw that part.
wasn't twisting ur words. was trying to figure out what ur saying.
I called you a troll not for not agreeing with me but cherry picking what part of my post you respond to even tho I already responded to your uncoming post further down in that very same post!
there was no agreeing or disagreeing, your opinion had nothing to do with you twisting and misrepresenting my words. THAT is what made you seem like a troll.
it's not my fault you answered without finishing reading... it's yours.
ur post I was responding to.
"his statements come across as insulting because the Christians here are making absolute claims, " did u read all ur type? though I should have been more clear and apologize for that part. though anyone who doesn't agree with u doesn't suddenly become an troll
"I'm not saying he shouldn't make his claim, I'm saying you shouldn't be mad at an appropriate response. a more timid claim would have gotten a more timid response."
neveralone in response to my post:
"wait so we are not allowed to use absolute tones but u can any time u want?"
you tell me to calm down (different thread) yet you clearly did not read what I said and made a useless response completely counter to what I said. are you trying to be a troll? this is not the first time this happened.
I can understand that. but this is more like an inspirational speech.
You seem to have again missed the point. If you use absolutes, don't be surprised when others do too. Understandable?
on the murder not the rest.
I didn't mean the black guy and murder scenarios to combine. also at that time everyone was doing that injustice not just white Christians.
he saying this because this is a way of life. it is not directed at u but most likely at other Christians. wait so we are not allowed to use absolute tones but u can any time u want? actually our righteousness comes from God. we are made humble. we are only an instrument. nothing more.a nd again it's most likely not directed towards u.
the key word is past as that is what he was talking about when you cried foul.
and why would a black person be considered a murderer because of his grandfather? chances are his grandfather was swinging from a tree, murdered by white Christians rather than the other way around.
his statements come across as insulting because the Christians here are making absolute claims, like they are the truth, the way, the only path to salvation, and the best way to counter absolutist claims is to show how absurd they are. bold claims deserve bold counters. you may not like the tone he is using, but I don't like the tone of the guy who made this thread. self righteous dickhead shoving his ideas down my throat with no prior prompting.
I'm not saying he shouldn't make his claim, I'm saying you shouldn't be mad at an appropriate response. a more timid claim would have gotten a more timid response.
I will stand by: he is not wrong.
he is technically because we are mainstream accepted as u said this makes us a religion.
key word past. if u are black should I call u slave because ur ancestor was. or murder because ur great grandpa was?
I can accept that. I won't accept the insulting nature though. I do not like when people pretend to be better than me. as I'm sure all agree
we have done this. we also like to debate. the only difference is we are throwing insults.
there is little difference between a cult and a religion outside of mainstream acceptance, and all faith based beliefs are illogical. he is not wrong.
he did not say Christians are all murders, he said their is blood in Christianity especially past, once again, he is not wrong.
you (christians) claim to be the truth, the righteousness, how are we supposed to not show you the blood covered past of your "righteousness" and the lack of logic and reason in your "truth".
keep your faith in the realm of faith and there will be little we can say. claim it as fact and you best back it up. and don't make claims that run counter to we'll documented history.
I'm not telling u anything. I'm going off faith. u do what u want. that's the point of free will. I'm at least considering the option
exactly noone before it was proven believed in evolution. yet it is still real. would u say it was wrong for scientist to investigate and believe it was real before their was evidence?
it's like of I called every atheist soulless heartless abominations that God should take off the earth. I don't believe this but imagine in every debate that involves religion u see this. would it not get tiring?
lmao. your telling us to believe in something because it MAY OR MAY NOT eventually get evidence? haha
that's not how it works. first you get evidence, then you can consider it fact.
Noone asked anyone to believe in evolution before there was evidence.
we are not mad and when we do these debates u don't have to believe them. that is why their is a disagree button no? I like to debate on the subject. it is quite nice. but being called a angry murderous delusional illogical cult eventually wears on a person.
but their is. a) we are not a cult. for one our religion has been verified in plenty of countries so kindly stop calling it something it's not.
and b) could we always see the evidence that evolution was here? or that we have cell? no but they were their. we just had to have the technology, know how, ambition, and faith that it was.
actually he is responding to you shoving the belief down his throat. read the thread title. if you push your religion on the unwilling, don't cry foul when they push back.
not a single "nonbeliever" here as made a thread attacking god. you "innocent" Christians keep making threads like this one proclaiming your correctness and get mad when we respond lol.
that IS sad.
you tell people to believe in 2,000 year old cult with no supporting evidence. I tell people to actually look at evidence. there really is no comparison.
ohh the naysayer. u know u say we shove our beliefs down ur throat a lot but what are u doing every time u say our faith is a shame?
just because you choose to believe something does not make it truth. if you believe the world is ruled by a spaghetti monster, that doesn't change reality.
there is no evidence anything in the Bible actually happened. there is barely any evidence Jesus even existed. so making a statement that he is the truth is completely ludicrous.
this is a statement on how we run our life. so yes it is true.
this doesn't even make sense. we can't even prove Jesus was a real person. we certainly don't have any idea what he thought or wanted. even if Jesus was the truth, there's no way to know what the truth was.