Righteousness through faith
-
So what is a false God?Originally posted by laurence82:icemoon didnt make any other insinuations
wrong god or false god can also mean, even a non christian like me also understand, that there is no such god.
i wonder what kind of dumb farks would come up with right god wrong god. -
so you have not answer my question yet?Originally posted by casino_king:So you are stuck again? -
I want to clarify .. I believe I didn't type "wrong God" .. with the capital G.Originally posted by casino_king:Before we go into other topics, I am asking you a very simple question, if there is a wrong God and a Right God, that makes 2 Gods. If you believe that there is only one God, how can there be a Right God and a Wrong God.
Clear that up in your own head first.
The difference is subtle, but important.
I'm always very careful with what I type. -
What is your question?Originally posted by laurence82:so you have not answer my question yet? -
re read my post, coz i dont repeatOriginally posted by casino_king:So what is a false God? -
false God is in your mind....it is all in the mind.........it is all in the mind.......Originally posted by casino_king:So what is a false God? -
am i a fortune teller or what? as predicted, he conveniently forget the questionsOriginally posted by casino_king:What is your question?
*collects 500 bucks from everyone* -
So if I say I have faith in God, how can I be wrong when there is only one God?Originally posted by Icemoon:I want to clarify .. I believe I didn't type "wrong God" .. with the capital G.
The difference is subtle, but important.
I'm always very careful with what I type. -
Then it is not important.Originally posted by laurence82:re read my post, coz i dont repeat -
If you can't prove laoda is a monkey .. then YOU ARE A LIAR.Originally posted by casino_king:So you are stuck again?
let's put it another way .. if you can't prove me wrong, THEN YOU ARE A LIAR.
-
u r not wrong...it is all in the mind.....look beyond tat....and u will find the way.....~AUM~Originally posted by casino_king:So if I say I have faith in God, how can I be wrong when there is only one God? -
it isOriginally posted by casino_king:Then it is not important.
but i dont repeat for people who conveniently forget them, you see -
Hmmm...I think finally I am getting enlightened by this thread....
Thank u CK....u have been a real help for helping us pigs find ur pearls....
-
quick, challenge him to sue youOriginally posted by Icemoon:If you can't prove laoda is a monkey .. then YOU ARE A LIAR.
let's put it another way .. if you can't prove me wrong, THEN YOU ARE A LIAR. -
OK I have come to the conclusion that since you people are not serious, I will ignore Icemoon; laurence82 and the monkey.Originally posted by Icemoon:If you can't prove laoda is a monkey .. then YOU ARE A LIAR.
let's put it another way .. if you can't prove me wrong, THEN YOU ARE A LIAR.
Use some other handle if you want. -
just a bit of infoOriginally posted by laoda99:Hmmm...I think finally I am getting enlightened by this thread....
Thank u CK....u have been a real help for helping us pigs find ur pearls....
in some places they put smashed oysters into pig's feed -
Thanks for the new nick...I am no ordinary monkey...I was a pig when u showed me ur pearls.....now u turn me into a monkey....did u conveniently forget this also?Originally posted by casino_king:OK I have come to the conclusion that since you people are not serious, I will ignore Icemoon; laurence82 and the monkey.
Use some other handle if you want.
BTW, pple call me......THE SPECULATION KING!!!!
Remember....tat's my name..... -
Wah lau eh!Originally posted by laurence82:just a bit of info
in some places they put smashed oysters into pig's feed
u sure? they eat such good stuff? Do they eat with Tobasco Sauce or lime? Got drink wine or not? -
once again .. prove that laoda is a monkey.Originally posted by casino_king:OK I have come to the conclusion that since you people are not serious, I will ignore Icemoon; laurence82 and the monkey.
Use some other handle if you want.
or you'll forever be THE LIAR. -
oysters, not the pearlOriginally posted by laoda99:Wah lau eh!
u sure? they eat such good stuff?
its prolly the protein and calcium -
Oddly enough I already answered you a long time ago, please refer to a few posts back.Originally posted by casino_king:Since you are not stuck and are so smart, then answer me: "If there is only one God, how can there be a right or a wrong God?"
But it seems that you are unable to do anything but ask questions, had you chosen to at least taken a little bit of time to answer things might be more productive. But since to jolt your memory and to destroy the myth of your question not being answered, I thus refer you to:
Arguing down on line, while internally consistent, does not mean your logic would be consistent when finally exposed to all of logicdom.
You asked a question if we truly believed with everything that there was only one God, then how can there be a right and wrong God?
Simply put there isn't- there is only one correct notion of God that everybody should (and I believe will) finally believe in the end. The real debate is over which notions of God get as closer to this absolute.
And in this you seem to have it mixed up somehow that wanting to hold a notion for a particular monotheism destroys theism itself, which is thinly argued out in your arguments on people co-opting ideas and writing books.
In the end views on a subject are views from a prespective, but certainly it cannot be said that all views are equal, but rather to be judged by the absolute itself. The very fact there is debate is because there is an absolute to be argued over in the first place, and the fight is all about if this or that view is better at grasping this absolute.
In the end your stance is self-defeating in the end. To accept truth claims as all equally valid would be to dissolve the absolute itself. It is as good as saying nothing by saying alot.
And another thing I don't quite get why you don't seem to get. Just because I may be of an opposing point of view with another person does not mean that I will have to be totally opposed to them. As far as I am concerned I am only in opposition when the first principle of non-contradiction is concerned. We will oppose when one says that Jesus was just a prophet while we see Him as God. We will oppose when they think that He never died on the cross while we think he did.
All the same we would agree if we both think that there is only one true God seperate from his creation as opposed to polytheism and pantheism. All the same we would hold the same view if we believed that He created all that we can observed.
That is not hard to understand at all, what is hard to understand is that while you appeal to the winds of logic at one moment, telling us to watch for contradictions in our own logic, the very next you decry objective logic itself by suggesting that to make an absolute truth claim destroys truth itself.
I believe wrong does not create or exist to itself, it is simply an lack of right. Right can exist without wrong but wrong cannot without some right to make it the way it is, that part is clear to me. So to answer your question, yes we do believe there is One God, and in no way that belief creates an paradox of 'how-can-there-be-a-right-and-wrong-god'... the paradox as it is, is purely imaginary and can only happen when one decides to abandon first principles (and oddly enough use them to construct some other arguments for the paradox).
To make it simpler for you to understand, I put it to you as this:
1) That your very question is a logical incongruity when tested against first principles. Unfortunately you cannot deny first principles
2) It is this incongruity that renders your question largely illogical, but yet I have tackled it in it's logical form. And the conclusion is largely as this: The notion of One God is perfectly logically (as a concept) sound.
3) Your orginal question is akin to asking: 'If there is only one answer, how can there be a wrong and right answer?' So let me answer you this:
We can logically believe there is only One God
-The right God is this One God
-And the wrong god is not this one God... in fact, it can't be said to be even a God at all. In that sense, no wrong 'Gods' exist but fallacies elevated to the level of them being God, but yet that does not make them God at all.
Apparently you know the solution to this very question yourself, but it seems you are reluctant to answer anything at all.
As apologists of old have pointed out, it's a question largely of nonsense and a failure to understand certain first principles. Garbage in, garbage out.
Let me alert you to another principle, as much as I do not approve of people mocking you, let me put it to you that it is very much deserved should you choose to go on this way. Obviously you have been putting out much nonsense as I can see from the way you are answering less and less and hoping to get by by shooing questions.
Now ask yourself this, what is the point of all this except to tire everybody with wild goose chases and feel better about yourself? Are you sure you are even living up to the standards of intellectual honesty, fair debate and scientific method you so confidenty touted when you first came in?
From what I have seen, people in here have been very patient and tolorent of your behaviour and sharp (and often unwarranted) attacks. I suspect you know you have been beaten in many areas fair and square, and pushing the issue will not make your case stronger at all. In any case, pushing about mostly-nonsensical questions and notions does neither you or me much good.
I suggest you leave here for a moment, go do your research, come up with a cohorent worldview, and then bring it back here for debate. Until you can do that, you have no true right to speak here at all except by the grace of others who have so kindly decided to take you like a kind teacher takes in a wayward pupil. -
to all,Originally posted by casino_king:OK I have come to the conclusion that since you people are not serious, I will ignore Icemoon; laurence82 and the monkey.
he has bypass us level 1 guys.
I think he wants to challenge the level 2 bosses - chin eng, vince and the Rex.
he might be interested to try the bonus stage - honey, macross and plo. -
if u cant fight level 1 bosses, still wanna fight level 2?
ambition damn big sia
its the fundamentals that will bring him down -
Dun let him go!!! He is needed for ratings!!!
-
If you haven't noticed, people stopped taking you seriously because you stopped being intellectually serious a long time ago.Originally posted by casino_king:OK I have come to the conclusion that since you people are not serious, I will ignore Icemoon; laurence82 and the monkey.
Use some other handle if you want.
In fact it seems that you want people to be serious about one thing: you.
The 'facts' and 'questions' you are pushing it seems, are largely besides the point of seriousness (in fact you don't seem very serious about them), and in fact I suspect had you been serious you might actually think a lot more before asking your questions. Asking questions is one thing, asking useful ones is quite another.
And I put one more this across to you... anybody reading this thread will get a clear idea of who has the upper hand of the argument most, if not all of the time. And I assure you it would most probably not be in your favour. They may even agree with you in worldview but certainly in all fairness they will find it hard to say that you have made any sort of a logical or cohorent case.
A tip: actually have your ideas, facts, arguments and everything in straight and well-known to yourself before plunging into debate. Study your own cause.
Reaching into Wikipedia to pick out arguments that support your own everytime you get stuck often fails because you might end up contradicting yourself (just because they support you for the point you are making does not mean they will not contradict you in the long run of reasoning). It avoids much humiliation and also makes more better debate, and also avoids the curious way of becoming a kind of a person who suddenly starts asking questions and is immune from answering, of the kind with which even fundemental atheists like Richard Dawkings would not touch with a 10 foot pole. Worse you use his arguments.