[ref001] #apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 5/5/96 #apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 5/5/96 [02:32] NCC

Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

[ref001] #apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 5/5/96 #apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 5/5/96 [02:32] NCCSA1862 (NCCSA186@hou-tx8-18.ix.netcom.com) joined #Apologetics. [02:32] Diogenes (diogenes@becker2.u.washington.edu) joined #apologetics. [02:33] Ah...irrational theism. [02:33] Diogenes: What's that? [02:33] RedTango (silver@ip179.lax.primenet.com) joined #apologetics. [02:34] Hello RT [02:35] hello [02:35] whew [02:35] Diogenes (diogenes@becker2.u.washington.edu) left #apologetics. [02:35] Jus1drful (b.jacoby@shark.commerce.com) joined #Apologetics. [02:36] yo [02:36] Hey RedTango, what were you saying about sadist? [02:36] oh, i said God is a sadist [02:36] RT: God is a sadist. Define your terms. [02:36] o.k. why do you think that? [02:37] we're waiting. [02:37] He uses eternal torture to punish people..and this is supposed to be the ultimate in intelligence. [02:38] RT: I would offer that that sentence "God is a sentence" contains a self-referential contradiction, and there is absurd, and untrue. [02:38] what? [02:38] you lost me there [02:38] Actually, we as individuals make the choice to be eternally separated from God. He gives us our wish--whether that be to love Him and ask forgiveness, or reject His Son and reject forgiveness. [02:38] I say that sentence contains a contradiction, and is untrue [02:39] so God isnt a sadist? [02:39] Correct: here it is: [02:39] He gave us the option through Jesus' sacrifice for our sins to be forgiven and be *promised* eternal life with Him. [02:39] Here it is: By "God" is to be understood infinite being, increated, having in himself all possiblities actualized all at once. [02:39] Jus, why have hell at all? Why cant God accept jews and bhuddists and all the other ways the people worship? [02:40] God is totally without limitations. [02:40] NCCA, God is a myth [02:40] I'm glad you asked....God is 100% holy in nature and cannot be in the presence of sin. [02:40] Sin has separated us from Him. [02:40] By "Sadist" is understood a particular type of being, namely with limitations, e.g. a sadist is not a philanthropist. [02:41] But these terms are mutually contradictory, and therefore God cannot be a sadist. [02:41] NCCA, i beleive God to be a sadistic mythological figure. [02:41] God provided a way for us to be forgiven of our sins and be cleansed so that we are positionally holy in His eyes. [02:41] Armchair semantics doesnt change anything. [02:42] Jus, are you married? [02:42] Yes. [02:42] RT: First, this is not semantics. [02:42] Do you love your wife? [02:42] Absolutely. [02:42] Mike_Baun (baun@fat-23.cybergate.com) joined #apologetics. [02:42] RT: Second, if your definition of God includes the following qualities: a) he does not exist, or b) he is limited, then: [02:42] Jus, and you also think that sinners can be forgiven and they can go to heaven if they repent, no matter what the sin? [02:43] a) no propositions can be made about him at all, or b) he is not really God, and so the proposition again fails/ [02:43] I'm just applying some logical rigor to your proposals. [02:43] Yes. Jesus died for *all* sins of *all* people on the cross. Our role is to trust in His payment and choose to willingly follow Him. [02:43] So if you were in Heaven and one of these sinners approached you, you would not condemn him because he accepted Christ....? [02:44] RT defaults. [02:44] Next? [02:44] NCCA, i do not get into the logical/contradictory disccusions where it turns into a mathmatical equation trying to cancel another one out...sorry. [02:44] Yves (yves@ joined #apologetics. [02:44] No....because only forgiven people can goto Heaven. I'm a sinner, but I have been forgiven. [02:44] RT: So you don't like thinking logically? OK, RT defaults, because he wants to be illogical. Next? [02:45] RT: Are you married by any chance? [02:45] Usually those sort of discussions are carried out by men who are afraid to feel anything and deal with real emotions and rela issues. [02:45] Yves (yves@ left #apologetics. [02:45] Emotions are irrelevant in the quest for truth [02:45] Hello Mike! [02:45] Jus, you didnt understand me, i am saying if you were in heaven and forgiven, and a sinner came up to you, you would love him, as he is forgiven too, no matter what the sin? [02:46] NCCA, emotion is where you will find the truth. [02:46] Yes i am amrried [02:46] Absolutely. [02:46] GREG (strandbg@UCS.ORST.EDU) joined #apologetics. [02:46] RT: Offer an explanation as to why. [02:47] Jus, so what if the sin of this guy was that he raped your wife, cut her up and presented her in a box at your doorstep...you would love him just the same? [02:47] hello all [02:47] NCCA, because religion is the result of fear and guilt. [02:47] Absolutely. [02:47] Locum (Schildt@slip56.vianet.net.au) joined #apologetics. [02:47] hello mike_baun and Redtango [02:47] Jus, what of your wife? [02:48] Hi Greg [02:48] Red herring. What does that have to do with it? By your own criteria, therefore, religion is true because it's based on emotion [02:48] No, i didnt say it is true, i said it was a result. [02:48] so what is this chanel supose to be about [02:48] RedTango, what if when you were dating your spouse and he (right?) put a gun to your head and said 'love me'. Is that love? [02:48] Sure, Greg, don't say hello to everyone. [02:48] Gee, no one wanted to stay in #bible with boring old Frank Bama? [02:48] Christinity is fundamentally historical based. [02:48] :) [02:48] The resurrection. [02:48] hey now red: be nice [02:49] The death of Christ. [02:49] Jus, explain the connection between that and your wife being chopped up. [02:49] Be nice? WHy, the guys a big bore. [02:49] Mike: What evidence would you offer to someone skeptical about the resurrection? [02:49] Pentecost [02:49] God didn't create us as robots. True love requires will to love the other person in the relationship. [02:49] Jus, and what of your wife? [02:49] My wife will be in Heaven no matter how she dies. [02:49] NCCSA1862: any thoughts on this yourself? [02:50] So nothing really matters to you then. [02:50] Mike, I do have some thoughts, but wanted to hear yours first! [02:50] So redtango: you jucked off without my knowing it and i was talkin to my self or was i [02:50] 100% of us are going to die none of us escape that fact....what is important is where we go when we die. [02:50] jucked off? [02:50] sorry [02:51] took [02:51] I love my wife and would dread that kind of death, but how she dies I cannot control. [02:51] Jus, so if a person rapes and strangles 100 women, they can go to heaven as long as they repent, but if an athesit spends a lifetime trying to heal women who have been raped, they go to Hell, correct? [02:51] Mike? [02:51] so what are you guys discusing sounded like some sort of killing or something [02:51] Well, everyone wanted me to leave, what could i do. [02:51] NCCSA1862: I'm here. [02:51] I asked a moment ago... [02:52] I want your thoughts first [02:52] NCCSA1862: thinking :) [02:52] RedTango, you are placing importance on what a person's merits are to get into heaven. God sees us all as sinners that cannot come into His presence. Even the 'best' of us sin. [02:53] NCCSA1862: I would take a historical approach together with fullfilled prophecy ... [02:53] Redtango: question. Do you not believe that there is a god? [02:53] Jus, so the atheists who help rape victims go to Hell, and the repented rapist/murderer goes to Heaven, correct? Yes or no? [02:53] Greg, i do NOT beleive in God, no. [02:54] Mike: keep going [02:54] redtango: You don't believe in God in any way shape or form. am i correct in saing this? [02:54] We stand on one side of a chasm and God is on the other....sin is the chasm. If you try to build a bridge across it, you will only make it part of the way because you are not 100% perfect. Only Jesus lived the perfect life t hat none of us could live and thus died as a perfect sacrifice on the cross for our sins. [02:54] RT: a decidedly illogical position, I might add... [02:54] Jus, yes or no? [02:54] His bridge goes 100 percent of the way across and spans the gap. [02:54] yes or no? [02:54] Yes. [02:55] The atheist is unforgiven, the murderer is. [02:55] And that is why i do not beleive in God. [02:55] man, that is so sick, so twisted. [02:55] But only because the murderer was forgiven by the shed blood of Jesus. [02:55] RT: Read Dante's inferno. [02:55] And people say atheists are "immoral" [02:55] Mike: I still want an elaboration [02:56] NCCSA1862: it would be very detailed [02:56] RedTango, even now Jesus offers you eternal life and you are choosing not to receive it. [02:56] That's fine [02:56] Locum (Schildt@slip56.vianet.net.au) left #apologetics. [02:56] I like detail [02:56] going over the recorded circumstances of the trial of Christ [02:56] redtango: I like to kinda think about sin in this way. Its kinda like a compass that doesn't point true north. what good is it. [02:56] A gift is only a blessing if you let someone give it to you, RedTango. [02:57] that is unfortunately true:) [02:57] Jesus' gift is free. No tricks. He offers you Life eternal if you admit you are not perfect and ask His forgiveness. [02:57] NCCSA1862: the first thing I would extablish is why He was brought to pilate [02:57] Jus, cant you see why this is so sick to me, at all? Certainly you can. [02:57] Very good. I'm listening [02:58] I can see you're standpoint, RedTango. It does seem unfair, but you aren't acknowledging that *all* people are sinful no matter how 'nice' they are. [02:58] RT: But youre being so illogical about it? Why should god accept you, if you spend your whole life rejecting him? [02:59] The entry requirement to Heaven isn't to do good things with your life. It is that you must be *perfect* to be in the presence of a Holy God. [02:59] Redtango: I think it is rather unfair of you to ask me or anyone else what Gods rightoues judgment will be, only a fool would try to answer that question with no qualifier [02:59] This can only come through a *perfect* sacrifice to remove your sins. [02:59] NCCSA1862: I would establish that it was because they wanted him to decree the death penalty. [03:00] Versus take the matter before the Sanhedrin [03:00] God doesn't hate people who go to hell. He sent his beloved Son to die a tortured death because He loves them so much. [03:00] Well, gentlemen, I'm off to bed. Mass tomorrow, you know. Mike: EMail me. I'm interested in what you have to say. NCCSA186@ix.netcom.com [03:00] Goodnight [03:00] see ya [03:00] NCCSA1862: I recommend a book [03:00] Who moved the Stone [03:00] Go ahead [03:01] What do you think about what I said there, RT? [03:01] Fine, but I'd like best to hear it from you... [03:01] NCCSA1862 (NCCSA186@hou-tx8-18.ix.netcom.com) left irc: Leaving [03:01] Jus, sorry, i was reading my e-mail [03:01] That's o.k. [03:01] Jus, i read it and it means nothing to me, i have had enough nonsense for one evening. [03:02] You have shown yourslef to be pretty twisted [03:02] see ya [03:02] What did I say that is twisted? [03:02] RedTango (silver@ip179.lax.primenet.com) left #apologetics. [03:02] typical bash [03:02] You can break down walls, but they run behind others because they are running from God. ================================================================= [17:29] newsong (newsong@perham-40.dialup.eot.com) joined #apologetics. [17:30] hello David [17:30] Hello! [17:30] hello David...glad to meet you again [17:31] you have some statements you wish to make? [17:31] Well, where is the evidence for god's existance? [17:31] I think I shared some over on Bible....what is your evidence He does not exist? [17:32] I will listen to your case about the non-existance of God...David [17:33] New - Well, since I do not know much about the topic, I was hoping someone here could enlighten me. [17:33] David!!!!....you don't know much.?????....interesting..... [17:33] Without being too personal...if I may ask.... [17:34] Have you attended a christian church [17:34] I have been to more churches than most people. [17:34] ok....christian?....can you share denomination? [17:35] All I am asking for is some evidence that god exists. [17:35] I understand....just wondering what your point of reference is....that's all... [17:36] here are a few places to start...wait 1 one.... [17:36] Waiting.... [17:36] !niv Rom 1 19 [17:36] hmmm...wonder if bot is working.... [17:37] Tell me in your own words, then. [17:37] Percy (goober.pea@xyp103p18.ltec.net) got netsplit. [17:37] newsong (newsong@perham-40.dialup.eot.com) got netsplit. [17:37] David7 (davidl@p17.t0.rio.com) got netsplit. [17:38] David7 (davidl@p17.t0.rio.com) returned to #Apologetics. [17:39] newsong (newsong@perham-40.dialup.eot.com) returned to #Apologetics. [17:39] Percy (goober.pea@xyp103p18.ltec.net) returned to #Apologetics. [17:40] the creator God?....reject the God who created you? [17:40] I'm a believer...but this isn't evidence is it? [17:40] New - Yes, what happens if one rejects him? [17:41] of course....that would...first and foremost...be that persons choice...correct? [17:41] New - Yes, a personal choice. [17:41] So, what happens to such a person? [17:42] Percy (goober.pea@xyp103p18.ltec.net) left #apologetics. [17:42] The question is not what happens to such a person.....the question is: how do you believe about God...who was revealed in the flesh through his son Jesus Christ? [17:43] New - but I am asking you: what happens to someone who rejects your god? [17:43] what happens if you reject Jesus Christ...who was made to be your atonement for your sin? [17:44] New - I am asking you that very same question. [17:44] The rejection of redemption that was provided for your sin...would mean that the consequences of sin...is death [17:45] and what is death....but separation from the presence of God [17:45] New - What does: "consequences is death" mean? [17:45] consequences of sin....don't misquote... [17:46] Well, what does that mean? [17:46] because man is born of sin.... [17:46] there must be a atonement made for that sin.... [17:46] How is it that man is born of sin? [17:47] Where did sin originate? [17:47] because of Adam's sin..... [17:47] sin originated with Lucifer....... [17:47] So, the sin of Adam is within each of us? [17:48] but Adam/Eve choose to disboey......and sin came onto the earth [17:48] you take issue with that....David [17:48] New - Ok, I got that so far, no problem. So, what you are saying is that the sin of Adam was passed onto us? [17:49] B_ (bc13@pool014.Max26.Los-Angeles.CA.DYNIP.ALTER.NET) joined #Apologetics. [17:49] yes....is that a issue with you? [17:49] Hello? [17:49] New - So far I understand. So, the way it works is that my parents passed that "sin" onto me? [17:50] hello B [17:50] Hey B [17:50] I have a really dumb question. [17:50] yes... [17:50] and that is why Jesus was sent.... [17:50] I noticed your topic... How can theism be rational? [17:50] Newsong - What was your answer? [17:51] New - So, my parents passed that "sin" onto me, right? [17:51] as did mine...DAvid....I am not justified thru my parents.... [17:52] New - How did my parents pass it onto me? [17:52] my parents cannot atone for me...only the blood of Jesus [17:52] ZenRookie (hyperion@blackhole.dimensional.com) joined #apologetics. [17:52] ZenRookie (hyperion@blackhole.dimensional.com) left #apologetics. [17:52] in Adam all die.....so in Christ all will be made alive [17:53] New - How did my parents pass this "sin" onto me? [17:53] Death came into the world as a result of Adam and Eve's sin.... [17:53] however...while we were yet sinners...Romans said...Christ bore our sins... [17:54] you still have stated what your opposition to God is...David... [17:54] New - How -exactly- did my parents pass this "sin" onto me? [17:55] because it passed through Adam.....the same way sin was passed to me via my parents.... [17:55] Later, maybe. [17:55] B_ (bc13@pool014.Max26.Los-Angeles.CA.DYNIP.ALTER.NET) left #Apologetics. [17:55] you take issue what such a statement? [17:55] We were all born into Adam;s physical family [17:56] All of us have reaped the results of Adam;s sin... [17:56] We have inherited his guilt, a sinful nature... [17:56] New - wait a second here. I am asking you how "specifically" my parents passed this "sin" onto me. Explain this. [17:56] what is your point? [17:57] New - this has to do with my views of your god. I would like you to answer that question. And please be specific. [17:59] perhaps I am not as learned as you David...I have attempted to state biblical truth...so then come forth with your view of my God.... [18:00] New - can you, or can't you, tell me specifically how my parents passed on this "sin" to me? [18:00] I have stated as clearly what the Bible says.....I apologize is that is not plain enough for you.... [18:00] is=if [18:01] Ok, my parents gave me genetic material, and nothing else (when I was in the womb, that is). So, this may give us a hint. Is "sin" physical? [18:02] is death physicial?.....or will death be both spiritually and physically? [18:02] New - what is the nature of sin? What "is" sin? [18:03] simply stated....unbelief [18:03] disobedience [18:03] So, the "sin" that adam passed onto the rest of humanity is "unbelief"? Is this correct? [18:04] rebellion [18:04] are we born into a knowledge of God?..... [18:04] Answer my question. [18:04] you have stated your answer...there is no God.... [18:05] No, I said I have not seen "evidence" of your god. That does not at all mean that god does not exist. Now, answer my question. [18:05] Is "sin" unbelief? [18:05] very interesting answer....DAvid.......so evidence and existing is different? [18:06] Is "sin" unbelief? [18:07] Is "sin" unbelief? [18:07] sin will be demonstrated by many different behaviors.....however, the core is.....choice....believe or not believe [18:07] so you do understand a Creator God that exists? [18:08] So, sin is a choice? In other words, when one is shown the evidence that your god exists, and that person rejects god anyway, then that person "does not believe"? Is this right? [18:08] sin is not the choice....belief is the choice [18:09] what is your purpose on coming onto Christian channels...especially when the Bible is not the basis of your paradigm? [18:09] Ok, so when one is shown the evidence and that person chooses not to believe, then that person living in sin? [18:10] what would qualify as evidence in your estimation? [18:10] Are we born into a knowledge of god? [18:10] are we?...how do you say? [18:10] Answer my question. [18:11] I think it's time you reveal who you are..... [18:11] I am that which I am. Now, answer my question. [18:11] hehehehehe.... [18:12] Topic changed by ApoloBot!bibleman@serss0.fiu.edu: The Home of Rational Theism [18:12] New - How is sin passed on from parent to child? [18:12] why do you not state your paradigm? [18:12] New - How is sin passed on from parent to child? [18:12] New - How is sin passed on from parent to child? [18:13] I have stated biblical truth as best as I can....what is your paradigm? [18:13] Can you explain that again? [18:13] no....state your beliefs.... [18:14] All I am interested in is the nature of sin. [18:14] if you are interested in this issue....how have you defined? [18:15] Adam and Eve got the knowledge of good and evil after they ate of the fruit, right? [18:15] go on.... [18:15] Right...? [18:15] go on [18:15] state your belief [18:16] Did they have knowledge of good and evil BEFORE they ate of the fruit? [18:17] what's your point? [18:17] Just answer my question, please. [18:17] don't be so veiled...state where your argument is going... [18:17] Look, they did not know what good and evil was WHEN they ate of the fruit, so why did god punish them? [18:18] Hello? [18:19] yes..... [18:19] Well, why did god punish them if they did not know any better? [18:19] because they were disobedient [18:19] But they did not know any better! [18:19] the issue is not the tree.....that they ate of....the issue was the disobeying of the signal command God gave [18:20] Sure, but they had no concept of disobeying. Remember that they did not know about good and evil! [18:21] Is that fair? [18:22] When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for good and pleasing to the eye.... [18:22] and also desirable for gaining wisdom...she took some and ate it... [18:22] She also gave some to her husband, who was with her...and he ate it... [18:22] Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked [18:22] so they sewed vig leaves together and made coverings for themselves... [18:22] Sure... [18:23] Adam and Eve got what they wanted: an intimate knowledge of both good and evil.... [18:23] But they got it by doing evil.... [18:23] and the results were disastrous...so say the least....!!!!! [18:24] Look, is it fair for a parent to punish a child for doing something that the child did not know was wrong? [18:25] Hello??? [18:27] newsong (newsong@perham-40.dialup.eot.com) got netsplit. [18:27] David7 (davidl@p17.t0.rio.com) got netsplit. [18:28] David7 (davidl@p17.t0.rio.com) returned to #Apologetics. [18:28] newsong (newsong@perham-40.dialup.eot.com) returned to #Apologetics. [18:29] Still alive? [18:29] sorry...i'm back [18:29] KYLE99 (SUM1@cs4-04.mil.ptd.net) joined #Apologetics. [18:29] KYLE99 (SUM1@cs4-04.mil.ptd.net) left #Apologetics. [18:30] so what is your point David? [18:30] My point is that your god was not being a fair parent when he put that sin onto humanity. [18:30] of course....God is God...He is not our parent... [18:30] then take your point up with God.... [18:30] Oh, then god did not make us? [18:30] to worship Him....that he would have a relationship with man... [18:30] and that relationship would be freely given from man to God... [18:30] net spit.... [18:30] hello [18:30] New - Your god was not fair to humanity. [18:31] i see.....that is your position... [18:31] Yep. [18:31] And he killed and destroyed millions of people. [18:31] of course....personally....it is not my position to convince you...only to speak biblical truth... [18:31] So, I do not follow him. [18:31] and your god....? [18:32] I have no god. [18:32] and then my God....does exist...you have just rejected Him for yourself... [18:32] David7...is your god? [18:32] What is your point? [18:33] what is the power of your diety? [18:33] are you sinless? [18:33] what is the atonment for you sin? [18:34] in what ways do you worship yourself? [18:34] I have no diety, I have no sin. I have no need for atonement. [18:34] you are sinless? [18:34] I worship nothing. [18:34] what is your purpose of being? [18:34] ahhhhhhhhhhh....my friend you are even more deceived than those who openly worship Lucifer [18:35] Why does there have to be a purpose? [18:35] because it is Lucifer's goal...not so much to have people worship him...(although he loves adoration)...but his goal of deception is to have David7 worship David7 [18:36] Did I say I worship david7? [18:37] because you had declared David7 as sinless.... [18:37] So? Explain how that means that I worship david7? [18:37] Mike_Baun (baun@fat-14.cybergate.com) joined #apologetics. [18:37] You are on the 'throne' of your life....You are in control of your life....You look only to yourself [18:38] Did I say all that? I never said those things. [18:38] Hello David [18:38] how many others do you deceive? [18:38] why do you come on Christian channels? [18:39] Answer my question. Did I say that I worship myself? [18:39] do you hunt for prey of your religion.... [18:40] Look, answer my question. YES or NO [18:40] I am curious what is the different between "evidence" and "existance" to you? [18:40] hello Mike [18:41] Hi Newsong [18:41] Answer my question. YES or NO [18:41] no...it is not incombent upon me to answer your demands.... [18:41] Did I say that I worship myself? [18:41] as you say [18:42] the words we speak are eternal..... [18:42] (hello Mike) [18:42] on the day of judgement..we will be justified by our words or condemned by our words...remember this... [18:42] New - Did I say that I look only to myself? Yes or No [18:42] David7: All you need do is make the statement "I do not worship myself". I'm often stuck with having to make assertions about my position here after some statement I make. [18:43] you state what your intention is.... [18:43] You did state that you are sinless.....David [18:43] New - I do not worship myself, I look towards others for help. [18:44] others...why...you said you are sinless? [18:44] David7: Do you believe there is such a thing as "sin"? [18:45] Mike - define "sin"? [18:45] exact quote: I have no diety...I have no sin..I have no need for atonement [18:45] David7 exact quote....above [18:45] New - So??????? What is your point? [18:46] David7:mamartia - missing the mark [18:46] hamartia - missing the mark [18:46] Mike - Huh? [18:47] David7: that is the greek for sin in the new testament - hamartia - which means missing the mark. [18:47] llorelei (on@fox-sl0.easyway.net) joined #Apologetics. [18:47] Action: newsong cuts a piece of peach pie for the group....and pours the coffee [18:47] good, I got here for the food :) [18:48] hehehehe...LL [18:48] Mike - what does "missing the mark" mean? [18:48] litterally "a missing of the mark" [18:48] New - What was the point of quoting me? [18:48] David7: first we must establish what the mark is [18:48] could someone explain to me the name of this group - Apologetics? [18:49] i'm sorry...did that offend you? [18:49] David7: without establishing that we don't know if we missed it or not [18:49] New - Nope. Just curious why you brought it up? [18:49] Resheph (elarson@moose.uvm.edu) joined #apologetics. [18:49] you have made yourself god by your declaration...David7... [18:49] New - How so? [18:50] you state you are sinless [18:50] only God can forgive sins [18:50] David7: and who sets the mark [18:50] New - Did I say I can forgive sins? [18:51] you have forgiven your own sins [18:51] New - Where does it say that only a god can be sinnless? [18:51] if you do not have sin...then you declare yourself a god [18:51] New - How does not having sin make me a god? [18:51] David7: An inherant position of Christian theology is that God sets the standards for hitting the mark - anything less then this is missing the mark (i.e. sin) [18:51] Jehovah God is sinless...Jesus Christ is sinless...there was no sin in Him!!! [18:52] New - show me how it is that one MUST be a god if they are without sin. [18:52] your statement puts David7 right up there with Jesus Christ....thereby you are declaring powers ascribed only for diety.....hence you worship yourself [18:53] New - show me how it is that one MUST be a god if they are without sin. [18:53] New - show me how it is that one MUST be a god if they are without sin. [18:53] New - show me how it is that one MUST be a god if they are without sin. [18:53] David7: One must not be god to be sithout sin - the angels that have not allen are without sin. [18:53] llorelei (on@fox-sl0.easyway.net) left irc: Leaving [18:53] David7: according to classical Christian theology [18:53] brb [18:54] Resheph (elarson@moose.uvm.edu) left #apologetics. [18:55] Well, now what? [18:56] David7: So where are you from? [18:56] Mike - My parents. [18:57] David7: heh heh --- no silly -- I mean Where is your home town? [18:58] Madelaine (geta@fix5.fix.net) joined #Apologetics. [18:58] what is apologetics? [18:58] It's when christains apologize for being wrong. [18:58] heh heh heh [18:58] oic [18:59] apologetics --- defense of the faith [18:59] from the greek work apologia [19:00] c'mon, really, what is it? [19:00] not nice to confuse philistines [19:00] In particular the Christian faith [19:01] hey now, there is no defense of faith [19:01] Madelaine: Christianity is primarily a historical faith. [19:02] The resurrection of Jesus Christ is an event in history. [19:02] there's no such thing as rational theism [19:02] it's an event in a book [19:03] Madelaine: in history [19:03] recoreded in the Bible [19:03] Just as the birth of Jesus Christ is a historical event. [19:04] you have proof christ resurected??? [19:04] No one saw him come back to life. [19:04] David7: Eyewitnesses say him die. [19:05] It is recorded that a spear was stuck in his side. [19:05] eyewitnesses who are all dead now and whose only words are printed inone book, that's not proof [19:05] Mike - Could have been made up to "keep the faith" going. [19:05] it is recorded, it is written, it is NOT prooven...do you know what rational means? [19:06] could you please define apologetics? [19:06] Madelaine: lets apply your test to nonbiblical claims that are accepted by historians [19:06] and see if it is a reasonable test [19:07] Mike - Is it possible that the resurection story was made up to conserve the faith? [19:07] mike, like what? the big bang THEORY!? it's a theory [19:07] duh [19:07] Madeline: Prove to be that the first president of the United States was George Washington. [19:08] Using your standards. [19:08] most historians have more than one book to proove if something happened or not [19:08] Mike we can visit his grave, dig it up and there he is! [19:08] Madelaine: at the time these writings were not all in one book [19:08] your position is moot on this issue [19:08] there were many sources [19:09] some are not included in what Christians call "the canon". [19:09] there's more than one record of proof that george was a president, besides, he didn't do anything inhumanly possible that i'm expected to believe just cuz it's written [19:09] Madelaine: tht is another issue [19:09] Styx (styx@p38.t0.rio.com) joined #apologetics. [19:09] Mike - could the resurection story have been made up? [19:09] Madeline: you yourself said all we have a somw written records -- what more do you have? [19:10] All hail Styx!!!!! [19:10] Action: Styx bows [19:10] Mike - could the resurection story have been made up? [19:10] Action: Styx is unipresent. He's always precisely where he is. [19:10] plenty if i really needed to proove it, but the point is, all you have is one book, and it's says some guy came back from the dead and you want me to believe it [19:11] Eliasberg (estoeben@asm4-1.sl040.cns.vt.edu) joined #apologetics. [19:11] hi [19:11] Mike there are descendents of George Washington. Cannot say the same for jesus-chrusties. [19:11] Madelaine: the point that I'm fundamentally making is that your test is not a fair one. [19:11] Madelaine: Did aristotle exist? [19:11] Some say that the story of George Washington is an exaggeration, too. [19:11] Mike - Why is it not fair? [19:12] Topic changed by ApoloBot!bibleman@serss0.fiu.edu: The Home of Rational Theism [19:12] i'm not asking you to believe george was president, i really don't care, it has no shaping on your philosophy whatsoever, but believing in the unreal, the irrational, the un prooven does...and i'm asking you again, what the hel l is apologetics, is there even such a thing, are you afraid to define it cause you don't even know yourself? [19:12] Mike - He may not have, actually. [19:12] i don't care if aristotle xisted, i'm not one of his follows or preachers am i? [19:12] Madelaine - WAY TO GO!!!!!! [19:12] Madekaine: that is another issue - I was responding to your first assertion [19:12] Aristotle did not have to actually exist in order for the teachings of that character (whether fictional or factual) to be valid. [19:13] Madelaine: the point is what standards do historians accept in determining the life of Aristotle [19:13] they are all the same issue, don't you see? are you blind? blind to the truth that there is no god an never will be??? [19:13] Mike - answer my question. Could the resurection been made up? [19:13] Hexanone (estoeben@asm4-1.sl040.cns.vt.edu) joined #apologetics. [19:13] David7: Could the moon be made of green cheese? [19:13] Action: Hexanone is now really here (Eliasberg) [19:13] the first question i asked was " what is apologetics?" if you don't remember, then it moved into christianity and rationalism [19:14] they all go together, can't you realise this? you have to define what you believe and what you don't [19:14] Mike - No. We have physical proof that it is not. Now, where is your physical proof that the story was not made up? [19:14] Mike: Many theologians would assert that "God could make it so" [19:14] Madelaine: I also noticed that you said rational theism was .... what did you say ...? [19:14] mike, are there also aliens? [19:14] is elvis alive? [19:15] uhh gw doesnt have any decendents [19:15] Madelaine: that is a whole nother subject!!! ;) [19:15] imposilbe, at least judging from my definitions of each of the words [19:15] it's an oxymoron [19:15] brb-server switch [19:15] Eliasberg (estoeben@asm4-1.sl040.cns.vt.edu) left irc: Leaving [19:15] It is illrational to believe in an event for which there is no evidence. [19:16] very good david, you get a gold star [19:16] David7: (irrational) [19:16] Nick change: Hexanone -> Eliasberg [19:16] david7: you said "no evidence" yet someone here said that a book recorded these events [19:16] Styx - Pyrex! [19:17] whats the topic right now? [19:17] david7: How about dealing with the claims of the historical record [19:17] Mike - It recorded events. But those events are not believable. [19:17] Mike: Do you believe that your god is omnipresent? [19:17] elias: apologetics, what is it really? [19:17] david7: for insance the historical record of the trial of Jesus Christ? [19:18] david7: Why was Jesus not tried by the sanhedrin? [19:19] Mike: His name was not Jesus Christ. That much is part of the historical record. Much in the same manner that history has changed Cristobol Colon's name to "Christopher Columbus". [19:19] Any one here familiar with the historical account of the trial of Jesus Christ? [19:19] Mike - Look, ya don't see people coming back to life all over the place do ya. His "so-called" resurection is a myth. Learn to live with it. [19:20] Mike - why cares? [19:20] Mike: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Josef is God? [19:20] David7: No - that is why it is considered to be a miracle - if it happened everyday it wouldn't be a miracle [19:20] y=o? [19:20] Mike - Did jesus die for our sins? [19:21] David7: You don't want to discuss the trail of Jesus? [19:21] mike, check out a movie called Jesus of Montreal and I'll check you later...bye [19:21] Madelaine (geta@fix5.fix.net) left #Apologetics. [19:21] Mike: Where can I hike this "Trail of Jesus"? Is it in the holy land? [19:21] Action: Styx ponders why Mike fails to answer questions posed of him. [19:21] Trial [19:21] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:22] Styx: one subject at a time [19:22] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:22] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:22] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:22] david7: one subject at a time [19:22] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:23] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:23] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:23] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:23] Styx - David7: You are already familiar with this claim? [19:23] Mike - did jesus die for our sins? [19:24] David7: Do you have a Bible --- look up John 3:16 [19:24] You can probably quote it to me. [19:24] David7: Can you quote Jogn 3:16 to me? [19:25] Mike - The topic is now: "Did jesus die for our sins?" [19:25] John 3:16 ---- anyone [19:25] If he did, then what good became of it? Sin still exists, and people claim that Jesus is not dead. What's wrong with this picture? [19:25] David7: I choose the trail of Jesus [19:25] Mike - just tell us. [19:25] Since it is relevant to that issue [19:25] its the "for god so loved the world blahblahblah verse" [19:25] Eliasberg: you do know the verse :) [19:25] Mike - who cares? [19:26] david7: A seeker of the truth would care. [19:26] yeah mike-do you believe in biblical inerrancy? [19:26] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:26] Another issue yet :) [19:27] Mike - there is no John 3:16!!! [19:27] heh heh heh [19:27] Mike - does god know everything? [19:28] david7: study the trail of Jesus .... it may surprise you. [19:28] david7: perhaps you can tear apart the historical record of the trail [19:28] give it a shot --- a few attorneys have [19:28] Mike - does god know everything? [19:29] newsong (newsong@perham-40.dialup.eot.com) left #apologetics. [19:29] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:29] mike -biblical innerancy? yes or no? [19:29] david7: I'm sticking to the record of the trail of Jesus Christ - that's it :) [19:29] so mike, what were jesus's last words? [19:29] You can't say that here. ;-D [19:29] Mike - are you going to answer our questions, or just continue to spew out side-steps to avoid flaws in the bible? [19:30] Action: Styx suspects the latter. [19:30] david7: examing the trail of Jesus is not an attempt to sidestep the issue [19:30] it is a direct on appraoch you don't seem top be interested in [19:30] I thought that this was "apologetics"; yet I see no apologies for errant scriptures. [19:31] I still wonder - why not discuss the trail of Jesus [19:31] Mike - do you think that the bible is without error? [19:31] perhaps you could find some flaw there [19:31] Mike - do you think that the bible is without error? [19:31] so mike, what were jesus's last words? [19:31] Mike - we are not interested in the trial. [19:31] Mike - do you think that the bible is without error? [19:32] david7: that much is obvious - but I can't see why not - it addresses all the issues you have been bringing up [19:32] David7: I strongly suspect that Mike has not read much of his bible. [19:32] Mike - you are losing our confidence in you because you refuse to answer our questions. [19:33] mike-lets see- you have for contradictory accounts of jesuss's life, plus a few extrabiblical sources which dont portray jesus as anything more than a human [19:33] for=4 [19:34] Styx - I agree. Mike has not read the bible. [19:34] I still wonder - why you have to make general comments - when I have offered to examine a specific one [19:34] EVERYONE - Mike is a fake! [19:34] KaraStude (kstudent@max3-147.HiWAAY.net) joined #Apologetics. [19:34] perhaps you are afraid of what you may find [19:34] Hello everyone [19:34] David7: If Mike had bothered to read the first two chapters of Genesis, he would see a blatant contradiction regarding which came first (Adam or animals). It depends upon which chapter you read. [19:34] Hey Kara! [19:34] heya kara [19:34] Hi David and Elias [19:34] Hi ho, Kara. [19:34] Styx: No one cares to debate 20 issues at once. [19:34] Styx: that would be silly [19:35] so mike-what were jesus's last words? [19:35] Hi Styx [19:35] Mike - Here is a specific comment/question - Did jesus die for our sins? Yes or No? [19:35] No, Mike. We're not afraid, because we read it and analyze it. You simply quote the parts that suit your interpretation of it. [19:35] _Wildcat (phillipd@ppp20.apex.net) joined #Apologetics. [19:35] heya cat [19:35] <_Wildcat> hey [19:35] Action: KaraStude says last words were Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani [19:35] <_Wildcat> huh [19:36] _Wildcat (phillipd@ppp20.apex.net) left #Apologetics. [19:36] EVERYONE - Lets talk about how it is that a god that knows all, had his son killed AND KNEW he would come back to life. What sort of sacrifice is that????? [19:36] Mike: That excuse is not viable, as you have failed to answer any questions posed to you. [19:36] uhh rad john and luke kara [19:36] Hello wildcat [19:36] Styx: to examine the trail of Jesus would require looking at a lot of the New Testament documents --- plus a lot of stuff outside the Bible [19:36] rad=read [19:36] Mike: Are you speaking of a trail, or a trial? [19:37] trial [19:37] typos [19:37] Mike - We are talking about this sacrifice of jesus. [19:37] Action: Styx applauds: That is the only question that Mike has answered of mine. [19:37] Nick change: David7 -> david_666 [19:37] ok mike-simple question-name what you think are the best books for and against xianity [19:37] hmmmmm [19:37] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:38] No interest in the trail of Jesus? [19:38] where's the trial in the roman records? [19:38] :) [19:38] ahhhh [19:38] that youve read mike [19:38] Mike - where is the record of the trial in the hebrew records? [19:38] david_666: another good question [19:38] Mike - where's the trial in the roman records? [19:39] Mike - where is the record of the trial in the hebrew records? [19:39] Mike - where's the trial in the roman records? [19:39] Nick change: Eliasberg -> EliaLurk [19:39] Nick change: EliaLurk -> EliasLurk [19:39] :) [19:39] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:40] Time for you seekers of struth to do some homework. [19:40] Mike: That shouldn't take too much thought. [19:40] Mike - The record of the trial was written by those who believe in jesus. Therefore, biased! [19:40] Mike - time for you to get a reality check! [19:40] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:40] david_666: perhaps - but in what way? [19:41] david_666: usually someone can show bias [19:41] the record of the trail doesn't have any in it [19:42] Mike - Open your eyes! [19:42] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? That shouldn't take you too long to answer. Yes, or no? Show some faith, and answer the question. [19:42] all these nonsense reasons [19:42] no specifics [19:42] just general condemnations [19:42] that doesn't take any thought at all [19:42] Why not look at the facts? [19:43] what record of the trial? it seems to go against roman law [19:43] Mike - what was the main point of the trial???? [19:43] KaraStude (kstudent@max3-147.HiWAAY.net) left #Apologetics. [19:43] Good point [19:43] Comdemnations come from your god, Mike. [ref: Hell] [19:43] mike-why dont you [19:43] Why was Jesus brought before the Roman authorities? [19:43] Do you know that? [19:43] Mike - answer Styx's question. [19:44] Why not the Jewish authotities? [19:44] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:44] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:44] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? That shouldn't take you too long to answer. Yes, or no? Show some faith, and answer the question. [19:44] Mike: Simple Yes/No query: Do you believe that Yasheweh ben Yosef is God? [19:45] David: Mike is afraid to answer. [19:45] David: His faith must be slipping. [19:45] Good bye all. [19:46] Chicken! [19:46] Have a pleasent afternoon. [19:46] Mike_Baun (baun@fat-14.cybergate.com) left #apologetics. [19:46] Mike - Press "Y-E-S, RETURN" if you agree or "N-O, RETURN" if not. [19:46] Mike -can you spell "Yes" or "No"? [19:46] as mike realizes he has lost, he leaves [19:46] CHICKEN!!! [19:46] He wimped out as predicted. [19:46] well, im hopping over to #bible [19:46] EliasLurk (estoeben@asm4-1.sl040.cns.vt.edu) left #apologetics. [19:46] Styx - Another one down the toilet! [19:47] I guess. What a boring dweeb. [19:47] Catchya on the 'smoke. [19:47] Styx (styx@p38.t0.rio.com) left #apologetics. [19:47] Styx - Was that a slip of the "tounges"? [19:48] Same old same old.... [19:48] Hey, he is over in #bible!!!! [19:48] RedTango (silver@ip061.lax.primenet.com) joined #apologetics. [19:48] yo [19:48] RedTango (silver@ip061.lax.primenet.com) left #apologetics. [19:51] Nick change: david_666 -> david_6^3 [19:53] Nick change: david_6^3 -> david_999 [19:55] david_999 (davidl@p17.t0.rio.com) left #apologetics. ================================================================ [22:24] Acolyte (st_aidan@delta1.deltanet.com) joined #apologetics. [22:25] Mode change '+o Acolyte ' by ApoloBot!bibleman@serss0.fiu.edu [22:26] Petrus (ethorne@ix-dc14-27.ix.netcom.com) joined #apologetics. [22:26] hola [22:26] Wow! there are peopple here! [22:26] yup [22:26] sometimes [22:27] Want to discuss anything [22:27] the raven sure [22:27] okay you cant prove the prin of contra without using it, therefore it cannot be proven [22:27] petrus false [22:27] none the less, the prin o f contra is fundamental to all other logica argument [22:27] petrus the impossibility of its denial is verification, we use it in mathmatics allthe time [22:28] acolyte you use it, yes, but use does not equal proof [22:28] petrus sure it does [22:28] David5 (TrudyMan@p17.t0.rio.com) left #apologetics. [22:28] we hold it to be true, but it cannot be proven [22:29] petrus the impossibility of the opposite is verificaiton [22:29] there are a few others like you cannot prove your own existence [22:29] petrus logic is not a predicate of truth, truth is not predicated to it, it is the subject, it IS truth [22:29] acolyte but there are people who deny the prin of contr [22:30] petrus right, and they are irrational as well [22:30] aco what do you mean? login is not a pred of truth, it is the subject? [22:30] petrus think about 1st grade [22:30] subject and predicate [22:30] right? [22:31] acolyte learned those in 6th grade - you mustve gone to a fast school [22:31] ok think on this... [22:31] Wade (Wade@www-45-115.gnn.com) joined #Apologetics. [22:31] the property Of truth is not predicated TO logic, the subject, rather truth and logic are the same [22:32] hullo wade [22:32] acolyte truth is not logic logic is a process, no? [22:32] hello [22:32] hello to wade [22:32] Petrus, logic is a subject as well [22:32] Petrus it is a thing [22:32] Petrus the Logic is God [22:32] en arche ho logos [22:33] acolyte the logic is god? [22:33] Originally was the logic [22:33] yes [22:33] in principio erat verbum ..et verbum erat deum [22:33] deus [22:34] logic and logos are 2 different words [22:34] translationplease, my latin is not all that hot [22:34] petrus not in greek [22:34] :-) [22:34] what is the logos in greek language? [22:34] logos = word [22:34] logos verbum word [22:34] the reason,t he wisdom, the logic of God [22:34] petrus fine, word, reason logic wisdom, all the sme thing [22:35] verbumn is LATIN, not GREEK [22:35] the logos is the expression of god and refers to the 2nd person of the blessed trinity [22:35] I know that [22:35] that is why Logic=God [22:35] logic = not god [22:35] the logos reveals the Father [22:36] yes [22:36] how can you have truth without logic? [22:36] u can't [22:36] hence is truth is eternal,thn so is logic [22:36] logic is th e process of learning the truth [22:36] petrus that is the predicationOF logic, but that is not logic itselt [22:36] petrusnow replace truth for logic in your last statement [22:36] the fact of something having existed will last forever [22:36] logic=truth [22:37] petrus but truth is eternal [22:37] look [22:37] no truth is a condition of the intellect [22:37] consider this [22:37] afr (arogers@p26.pm3.theriver.com) joined #apologetics. [22:37] hello to afr [22:37] 1. Turth exists, that proposition will always be true [22:37] hi all [22:37] petrus truth is independant of the intelelct [22:37] it does not exist in reality allthough the universal concept of truth does not exist [22:37] petrus truth is a property predicated to a term in a proposition or to a proposition on the whole [22:38] brb [22:38] call [22:38] for me to have truth, my intellect must conform to what is [22:38] brg [22:38] brb [22:38] afr (arogers@p26.pm3.theriver.com) left #apologetics. [22:38] Petrus truth is already in you, hence jn 1:9 [22:39] Wade (Wade@www-45-115.gnn.com) left #Apologetics. [22:39] petrus there was never a time when proposition 1. has been false [22:39] well, we are using truth in different meanings [22:39] 1. Turth exists, that proposition will always be true [22:39] I you are talking about truth as a predicate, Iam talking about truth as a subject [22:40] scratch I [22:40] yeah, but that is different meaning or sense to the word truth [22:40] I know [22:40] that is what IU am trying to get u to see [22:40] in philosophy , truth is a condition of the intellect [22:40] hence truth is eternal [22:40] false [22:40] in SOME Philosophies [22:40] not all [22:41] secondly, it is a state of the intelelct in regards to some propositions that the intellect affirms, but that is not the thing itself, only the predication OF the thing, of Turth that is [22:41] but for me to know any thing as true, say a fact, my intellect must conform itself to that fact - e g geo washington was a pres of th e us of a [22:42] petrus your mind will affirm it, but that the act of predicating truth as a property, NOT Truth in itself [22:42] petrus Iamtalking about th latter [22:42] hence god=Truth [22:42] and logic =Truth [22:42] Logic=God=Truth [22:42] nice Trinitarianism there eh?! [22:42] ;) [22:42] acolyte well, yes, god is truth [way truth and life] [22:43] petrus and he is logic [22:43] for Logic=Truth [22:43] if our intellects conform to him then we have th etruth [22:43] if Logic does not = truth then everything is messed big time [22:43] there is logic in god but i dont think that god is logic [22:43] petrus no, we become LIKE the truth [22:44] logic is a process and implies change and god does not change [22:44] hence 'You are the light of the world" [22:44] Petrusbut that is logic as a predicate again, not as itself [22:44] petrus eternal ideas don't change [22:44] Truth never chanegs [22:44] neither does logic [22:44] because [22:44] Logic=Truth [22:44] and vice versa [22:44] therefor e there can be no logic in god [22:45] petrus only if yousee logic as not equal to Truth, which is absurd [22:45] is logic= to truth in al lcases or no? [22:45] i dont know enough philosophy to discuss this further, but i dont feel that i can agree with you [22:45] ok fine [22:45] but [22:45] think on it [22:45] anyhow u can find it in many of the early xians [22:45] i m thinking! i m thinking [22:45] and I think the NT as well [22:46] early xtians? like who? [22:46] McMurphy (JGH95001@uconnvm.uconn.edu) joined #apologetics. [22:46] petrus liek Justin MArtyr [22:46] hello murf [22:46] hullo mIc [22:46] So, what's this place about? [22:46] i didnt know protestants read just marty [22:46] Defnse of Christian Theism [22:47] Petrus I am not Prot ;) [22:47] You get that acolyte? [22:47] that is right! prots dont have acolytes [22:48] L @@@ mt 16 18 [22:48] Ljn 6 53 [22:49] Acolyte: This is your defence? [22:49] mcmurphy nope [22:49] just some verse back at u [22:49] ;) [22:49] Acolyte: Ah. Obviously the one I sent for you had no effect. [22:50] Need to see it again? [22:50] mcmurphy no, I don't think you have the right to interpret the text in the first place [22:50] mcmurphy, after all, it is OUR Book [22:50] ooohh! that is hard! [22:50] The right? [22:50] your voice means nothing outside the Church [22:50] Your book? [22:50] aco now you sound like tertullian [22:50] Mike_Baun (baun@fat-4.cybergate.com) joined #apologetics. [22:50] You don't even know who you are talking to. [22:50] McMurphy no verse u bring up wil have any sawy since you do not have the authority to interpret it at all [22:50] hey mike! [22:51] mcmurphy do I need to? [22:51] Hello Petrus [22:51] mcmurphy r u a Theist? [22:51] aco why do you say that mac has no auth to interp? [22:51] Acolyte: Holy shit you are arrogant! [22:51] Petrus Tertullian is cool to a point [22:51] aco to a point indeed [22:51] mcmurphy the church and the CHURCH ALONE has the right of interpretation of the scriptures, NOT HEATHENS [22:51] Acolyte: Yeah, I think you should have some idea of whom you are talking to. [22:51] Anyone interested in going over the trial of Jesus Christ? [22:52] McMurphy r u a a theist? yrs or no? [22:52] Acolyte: Am I a theist? A little late to ask that, isn't it? [22:52] aco be nice to murph .... [22:52] mike yeah, go ahead [22:52] Acolyte: Are you a catholic? [22:52] David5 (TrudyMan@p17.t0.rio.com) joined #apologetics. [22:52] mcmurphy just looking for verifcation for who I think u are since u ar emaking a big deal about it [22:52] mcmruphy depends [22:52] mike altho i dont have any hexapla here or anything like that [22:52] David5 (TrudyMan@p17.t0.rio.com) left #apologetics. [22:52] mike what in particular> [22:52] aco depends? yes or no [22:52] mike what in particular? [22:52] The whole idea of the protestant movement was that people could have a relationship to god without the priesthood. [22:52] petrus yes it depends [22:53] Mcmruphy AHHAHAHHA wrong answer [22:53] mcm that is inscriptural [22:53] Acolyte: there are a lot of aspects to it ..... [22:53] mcmurphy go read some Calvin [22:53] Acolyte: as you know [22:53] mcmurphy I am Catholic but not ROMAN [22:53] Luther translated the bible into German so that the *people* could read it and make up their own minds about it. [22:53] aco you are either a catholic or not a catholic - the prin of contra ..r emember? [22:53] mcMurphy SO? that was done BEFORE luther [22:53] Petrus I am Catholic just not ROMAN Catholic [22:54] aco oh? one of those? [22:54] Acolyte: In German? [22:54] petrus there is more than one kind of it [22:54] Mike inthe east, read some history [22:54] mike sorry [22:54] aco are you in union wiht rome or no? [22:54] petrus nope [22:54] petrus but neither are Greek ORthodox, still Catholic tho [22:54] mcm luther was not the 1st to x-late the bible [22:55] Acolyte:Protestants don't need you or your priests telling us what to do. We worship god in our way, not some pontiffs way. [22:55] aco if yuou are not in union with rome , you are no t any kind of catholic [22:55] mcmurphy besideds the bible could be had by anyone at most times in Europena history, if they could afford it [22:55] aco you must be a lefebrvrist or a feeneyite [22:55] Petrus are Russian Orthodox Catholic? [22:55] petrus WHAT? [22:55] Petrus: Who beat him to it? Whoever it was, his work didn't have the impact of Luthers. [22:55] aco you said you are not greek ortho - [22:56] Acolyte: And if they spoke latin, which almost no one outside of the church did. [22:56] Acolyte: It was translated into German earlier? ( I know there were other translations into the common language - after all ther Greek was written in every day usage of the language rather then some sort of theological Greek) [22:56] mcMurphy u are an atheist, so what does it matter what U think? [22:56] mcm true on that, but there were x-lations of parts at least [22:56] mcmurphy some merchants did and all the aristocracy did [22:56] I mean mike [22:56] Acolyte: Don't presume to know my mind, you arrogant little boy. You could use a few lessons in manners. More than a few. [22:57] aco are you russ ortho [22:57] Petrus I am Anglican Catholic. Catholicty does not =Roman Catholocism [22:57] Acolyte: Besides, the meaning of the passage I quoted is quite clear, and right now, it is you who are troubling his won house. [22:57] mcmurphy you are an atheist are you not? [22:57] Catholicty? Is that a word. [22:57] mcmurphy oh really? [22:57] aco since you are cut off from the vine , the branch is dead [22:57] mcmurphy is the bile true or false? [22:57] Bible even [22:57] mcmurphy yes, it is, look it up Catholicity [22:57] Acolyte: No, I am not. Game, set, match, you lose. [22:58] petrus what? [22:58] aco you could join ht e church and become a member of the anglican rite [22:58] Petrus why? the English church is OLDER than the Roman Church [22:58] aco well that is hardly true [22:58] mcmurphy so the fool thinks to himself [22:58] petrus it is very true [22:58] Acolyte: There are many degrees of truth and falsehood. [22:58] mcmurphy you got all degress of the latter [22:58] brb [22:59] aco the roman church was fouinded by peter and paul - the anglican church by augustine about 600 years later [22:59] Acolyte: I agree ... the accusation that the Roman church didn't want for the common people to read the Bible and that is was chained to the table, etc. is because the Bible was not within the means of most to own a copy. [22:59] Petrus false, the anglican church ssen bishops to the council of arels in 312 AD [22:59] Acolyte: So far, you have shown yourself to be quite the fool. [23:00] You attack a foe you do not know when there is no need to do so. [23:00] Hey I got a call brb [23:00] aco so, the roman church existed 250 years before that - besides the british churhc of which you speak was wiped out in the invasions [23:00] That is foolishness. Where you could have made a friend, you have made an enemy. [23:00] Petrus ever herar of King Carodock? [23:00] aco go ahead [23:00] Acolyte: Don't have the value in adverage wages ... but it would take the average peasent many years to save up enough money to buy such a work. [23:01] mike yes, books were valuable then and that is why they were chained up [23:01] Mike: It went way beyond that. The Bible was in latin, which basically only priest could read. And furthermore... [23:02] petrus he was the celtic king in about 40 AD and taken to Rome as a prisoner war by the romans and he coverted and established in Rome a house called Britainia House, which is where the first Christian in Rome came from. [23:02] aco and besides age alone is not a mark of apostolicity , unity with the vine is [23:02] Mike: The corruption of the Roman church in the middle ages is not disputed even by the present day church. [23:02] aco where is that found? [23:02] Petrus number of works [23:02] Acolyte: Nice talking to you. Ask yourself this: would you behave like you do if we werent separated by an electronic wall? [23:02] mc m agreed, but the church was not corrupt - it is the bride of xt [23:02] Lovestory (LS@ joined #apologetics. [23:03] Petrus, a few of the new xians at Britiania house are mentioned in the NT by St Paul [23:03] aco name one [23:03] McMurphy yup [23:03] Petrus: Huh? [23:03] Hey, Petrus [23:03] Petrus St Bede, History of the English CHurch and People [23:03] Petrus 7th century work [23:03] Petrus Britania house still stands in Rome to this DAY [23:04] have a nice day I have to go [23:04] hello love [23:04] aco name them [23:04] aco yes but all that is to the bad, because the british church was wiped out in the invasions [23:04] Acolyte: Then I bet you got beat up a lot in school. [23:04] McMurphy: I'm just trying to establish that they were valuable works .... that the modern mind can't conceive of how poorly educated the peasents actually were [23:04] may I ask what "Petrus" means? [23:04] David5 (TrudyMan@p17.t0.rio.com) joined #apologetics. [23:04] McMurphy: the Roman Church even recented acknowledged doing things that were very antisemetic during World War II [23:04] Mike - there you are! [23:04] Mike: I agree, but there was also the factor of a priestly class trying to maintain it's position. [23:04] McMurphy!JGH95001@uconnvm.uconn.edu kicked by ApoloBot!bibleman@serss0.fiu.edu: be nice to ops [23:04] never heard of it [23:04] bye [23:04] We want you to join us in HolySmoke. [23:05] Aco: Do you have to leave? [23:05] live petrus is the latin form of the name of simon johnson, whose name jesus changed to rock or peter [23:05] Oh well ---- if you have to go - I understand. [23:05] McMurphy (JGH95001@uconnvm.uconn.edu) joined #apologetics. [23:05] mike not true either [23:05] Acolyte: Haha! I won! [23:05] thanks [23:05] Do you know me, Petrus? [23:05] Mike - You there? [23:05] hey mcm [23:06] love peter is the leader of the apostels and is the 1st pope [23:06] David5 (TrudyMan@p17.t0.rio.com) left #apologetics. [23:06] Acolyte: If you act like this in rl, I bet you have few friends. [23:06] I see [23:06] love no, i dont think i know you ...i may have seen you here adn there on irc but i reallydont remember [23:06] there is another Petrus [23:06] mc m aco is gone [23:07] McMurphy!JGH95001@uconnvm.uconn.edu kicked by ApoloBot!bibleman@serss0.fiu.edu: be nice to ops [23:07] love once in a whle i have to change petrus to something else because some one else is using it [23:07] later [23:07] McMurphy (JGH95001@uconnvm.uconn.edu) joined #apologetics. [23:07] Acolyte (st_aidan@delta1.deltanet.com) left irc: Leaving [ref002]Return to #apologetics Home Page [ref003]Return to LOGS Page [ref004]Go to the MCU Virtual Library [ref001] http://mcu.edu/library/logs/log_5_5_96.html [ref002] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/apologetics.html [ref003] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/logs.html [ref004] ../


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank