An Atheist (Fool) Debates Bob: IV (Final Episode)

[fool]

Exactly. So many unbelievers have the emotions of rebellious teenagers who if asked what they would do if they were ordered by their parents how to spend their money reply, "I would rebel even if my parents told me to spend it on something I wanted."

Butchering infants is a little bit different than what jeans to buy Jeff.

 

[allsmiles]

Exactly. So many unbelievers have the emotions of rebellious teenagers who if asked what they would do if they were ordered by their parents how to spend their money reply, "I would rebel even if my parents told me to spend it on something I wanted."

most unbelievers would actually like to be spoken with rather than to or at, and most would like to be spoken with as if they were adults. that you can't do that is your problem, not ours :nono:

 

[fool]

Amen!

It would be interesting to discover just what drives this emotional anger. It appears to be completely irrational. But I think it is seated in some desire for independence from God (or any other person for that matter) controlling what He is Lord over. They loath the whole idea of submission to God...no matter how benificial it would be for them, and for the entire creation.

And yet in the foolish question thread you responded with;

I would sooner perform an abortion.


I would not do it.

So you're refusing to submit to God as well!
Which is it Logos? Are you now saying you'll do it?
(just trying to keep track)

 

[fool]

Do ya like my new sig Bob?

 

[Granite]

Do ya like my new sig Bob?

:thumb:

And I notice Enyart's back...

 

[fool]

Hey Bob, are you gonna come out with a manuscript version of "the fool dialogs"?

 

[logos_x]

And yet in the foolish question thread you responded with;

So you're refusing to submit to God as well!
Which is it Logos? Are you now saying you'll do it?
(just trying to keep track)

No. I'm not saying I would do it for the reasons that have been put forward in that thread...which are that if God "orders" something it must be wrong.

Would I kill kids? No.
I guess if God disapproved of that decision, He would either have to forgive me for this "sin", or kill me for not killing kids.

But...our world today is more civilized as regards the children of enemies, and provision would be made for their care and their rights protected. It's a different world...at least here.

But...would I kill a child abuser?
Without hesitation.

Would I kill a child abuser who abused them for his or her "god".
Without hestation...and I would advertise the fact, and I would take no prisoners.

And I would do it on moral grounds.

Now, ...what would you do? Leave them alone. Not get angry? How long would you put up with it? And would you be justified in taking action?

And...if you lived then would you have spared the kids if you took action? Knowing that no one would care for the kids unless you saddled your own people with that responsibility?
Could you rely on your people to actually carry out your wishes concerning the kids? What would you do if they didn't?

If I lived then, I probably would have no choice but to do as God commanded for all those reasons. I would not like it...and I don't think they did either.

And...rather than cover the whole affair up...they recorded it in their history. I don't think any other nation would've done that.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

fool is only fooling himself.

 

[On Fire]

most unbelievers would actually like to be spoken with rather than to or at, and most would like to be spoken with as if they were adults....

Said the guy who refers to himself as a child.

 

[logos_x]

That is, simply put, one of the stupidest analogies I've ever heard. :devil:

Are you a parent of teenagers?

 

[PureX]

The real problem that Bob has that I see, is that he has set himself up as the man who interprets the bible for the rest of us, and then defines God and morality and holiness and righteousness for the rest of us, based on the assumption that he interprets the bible more accurately than we do. Bob has decided that he knows who God is and what God wants better than we do, and so has taken it upon himself to explain who God is and what God wants to the rest of us. This is the fundimental flaw of all evangelists, because in the end they have nothing to base this assumption on but the conviction of their own egos.

How can anyone prove that they know God better than anyone else? And if they can't prove it, why are they living by such an arrogant pretense?

My question for Bob would have been: how does Bob know that he understands God better than we do, and if he doesn't know this, why is he behaving as if he does?

 

[Granite]

Are you a parent of teenagers?

Been there and done that, so I can speak on the subject. Try again.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

My question for Bob would have been: how does Bob know that he understands God better than we do, and if he doesn't know this, why is he behaving as if he does?

And your question would have been entirely irrelevant.

If you actually listened to the shows you would know the topic was less about God and more about fool's own rejection of the idea of a righteous God.

 

[fool]

And your question would have been entirely irrelevant.

If you actually listened to the shows you would know the topic was less about God and more about fool's own rejection of the idea of a righteous God.

Wrong.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Wrong.

There isn't a single clear thinking soul that could have listened to show #4 and not realized how "spot on" Bob was.

It was one of the CRYSTAL CLEAR moments that happen occasionally.

 

[fool]

There isn't a single clear thinking soul that could have listened to show #4 and not realized how "spot on" Bob was.

It was one of the CRYSTAL CLEAR moments that happen occasionally.

Bob dosen't value his own life enough to want to finish it. How could he value someone elses with an attitude like that? I see Bob's lurking, Don't you have a show to do Bob?

 

[Granite]

And your question would have been entirely irrelevant.

If you actually listened to the shows you would know the topic was less about God and more about fool's own rejection of the idea of a righteous God.

Cute trick, deflecting the issue from Enyart's rotten theology to fool. Convenient.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Bob dosen't value his own life enough to want to finish it. How could he value someone elses with an attitude like that? I see Bob's lurking, Don't you have a show to do Bob?

But you are not a moral relativist fool!

No, I'm not a relativist.

Therefore.... wasn't the entire 4 episodes a bit of a wasted effort?

Afterall... you could have just as easily been asked a trick question you would similarly explain their misunderstanding. Now that you have admitted you are believe in moral absolutes wouldn't you agree you did not engage Bob in good faith?

 

[fool]

But you are not a moral relativist fool!


Therefore.... wasn't the entire 4 episodes a bit of a wasted effort?

Afterall... you could have just as easily been asked a trick question you would similarly explain their misunderstanding. Now that you have admitted you are believe in moral absolutes wouldn't you agree you did not engage Bob in good faith?

Wrong again Knight!
This would be funny if it wasen't so sad.
Do you remember the first time you heard my voice?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Do you remember the first time you heard my voice?

Yes.