圣经充满了谎言吗？-诚邀ForwardRetreat网友讨论

C

CHRIS88

基督门徒
管理成员
VIP
注册
2006-05-10
消息
13,669
荣誉分数
1,375
声望点数
393
特以此帖诚邀ForwardRetreat网友讨论。


ForwardRetreat 说:
THE SO CALLED HOLY BOOK IS FULL OF FANTASIES, VIOLENCE, PORNOGRAPHY, HATRED, CRUELTY, SENSELESS GENOCIDE, DIVIDING OF HUMANITY, AND MOST OF ALL- LIES.
点击展开...
 
每个人都有权利对任何宗教信念和宗教经典作出自己的判断，您也一样。您的观点并不新鲜，但如果您愿意，我很乐意就您认为是谎言的圣经章节讨论。看看中间有没有误解？
 
ForwardRetreat 说:
THE SO CALLED HOLY BOOK IS FULL OF FANTASIES, VIOLENCE, PORNOGRAPHY, HATRED, CRUELTY, SENSELESS GENOCIDE, DIVIDING OF HUMANITY, AND MOST OF ALL- LIES.
点击展开...

您这么想的，借着这个机会就这么说出来了，说明您很诚实。但诚实的人也可能出现错误，所以互相交流是有好处的。毕竟错失真理或者误信谎言都是很可悲的一件事。

通过交流，或许您就帮我摆脱了圣经谎言的捆绑，也或者我帮您认识到了圣经的真理。都是好事。即使我们谁也说服不了谁，至少有些思想的激荡，对其它网友有所帮助也不错啊。
 
save the specific details in the future if they are of interest of both of us. for now why don't you start from the foundation of christianity and its script the bible. religion is based on the belief in a deity, more pricisely in this case, the christian god. when bibles starts by saying the christian god created the world, that's when the lie starts.
 
CHRIS88 说:
证据？
点击展开...
you believe one more thing that i do when it comes to how the world came into being - that is the necessity of introducting a diety. the burden is on your shoulder to prove there is in fact a diety before any diffusion follows.
 
ForwardRetreat 说:
you believe one more thing that i do when it comes to how the world came into being - that is the necessity of introducting a diety. the burden is on your shoulder to prove there is in fact a diety before any diffusion follows.
点击展开...

您这是承认您没有证据吗？:)
 
in the science of logic, you can not refute an argument if the argument is not offered. offer an argument, it might stimulate a more intellectual converse.
 
Well, you did offer an argument but failed to offer any evidence to support it. By demanding what is missing, I am just following the convention of debate. Right?
 
CHRIS88 说:
Well, you did offer an argument but failed to offer any evidence to support it. By demanding what is missing, I am just following the convention of debate. Right?
点击展开...

It does not appear that you have experienced much formal schalorly debate other than church style biased conversion meetups.

Both of us have yet to offer any arguments. You provided a thesis and I provided an anti-thesis. Burden is on your shoulder now to offer arguments.

If you have not attended any formal scholarly discussions on the subject of theism vs atheism/agnostics and continuing on exploiting church style biased prejudice, we will not get anywhere. I have better things to entertain.
 
这世界的来源，就是两种可能：物质的还是物质以外的（神创的）。

其实双方都没有也不可能有足够的证据去说服对方。我接受神创论，靠的是信，您反对神创论，靠的也是信。只是我明白的承认我的是faith，而您很想给您的faith披上一件科学的外衣。

问题是，勉强用科学装点起来的信仰还是信仰。而这用来装点信仰的科学就近于伪科学了（说近于，是考虑到很多反对神创论的人其实还是承认科学的局限性的）。
 
ForwardRetreat 说:
It does not appear that you have experienced much formal schalorly debate other than church style biased conversion meetups.

Both of us have yet to offer any arguments. You provided a thesis and I provided an anti-thesis. Burden is on your shoulder now to offer arguments.

If you have not attended any formal scholarly discussions on the subject of theism vs atheism/agnostics and continuing on exploiting church style biased prejudice, we will not get anywhere. I have better things to entertain.
点击展开...

呵呵，不要撤退得这麽快嘛。您就教我一点学术辩论的风度规则岂不也是善事一件？:)

好，我们来回顾一下我们不长的辩论史。

一开始是您在别版对圣经提出了一大堆指控。于是我邀请您来具体讨论，此时我并没有提出任何的观点。结果您来了，具体指责圣经的开头关于创世的描述是谎言。于是我小声问“证据”？

然后您说，你（你就是我啦:)）是那该提出证据的人！

我凭什么啊我。于是小人之心了一下，问“您这是承认自己没证据吗”？

然后呢，这话题好像一下子就转到我是不是有足够的修养和训练来和您讨论de问题上面去了。是不是这样？

其实，您没有证据，大方承认不就得了？
 
CHRIS88 说:
呵呵，不要撤退得这麽快嘛。您就教我一点学术辩论的风度规则岂不也是善事一件？:)

好，我们来回顾一下我们不长的辩论史。

一开始是您在别版对圣经提出了一大堆指控。于是我邀请您来具体讨论，此时我并没有提出任何的观点。结果您来了，具体指责圣经的开头关于创世的描述是谎言。于是我小声问“证据”？

然后您说，你（你就是我啦:)）是那该提出证据的人！

我凭什么啊我。于是小人之心了一下，问“您这是承认自己没证据吗”？

然后呢，这话题好像一下子就转到我是不是有足够的修养和训练来和您讨论de问题上面去了。是不是这样？

其实，您没有证据，大方承认不就得了？
点击展开...

i am at work. i do not have as much as time as you do.

well your classical cosmological argument for the existence of a god suffers one fatal drawback. you have not provided any argument as of why it is neccessary for the natural universe to have a cause. furthermore, why the cause has to be a more elusive concept. which natually follows, if anything needs a cause, who causes the cause that caused the universe, namely, who caused god.
 
ForwardRetreat 说:
i am at work. i do not have as much as time as you do.

well your classical cosmological argument for the existence of a god suffers one fatal drawback. you have not provided any argument as of why it is neccessary for the natural universe to have a cause. furthermore, why the cause has to be a more elusive concept. which natually follows, if anything needs a cause, who causes the cause that caused the universe, namely, who caused god.
点击展开...

呵呵，您的问题都是您的问题，不是我的问题。也就是说，您很可能已经被自己转糊涂了。我只是简单地说，1）这世界的起源，不是物质的就是非物质的；2）双方都没有足够的证据；3）我大方承认我没有证据，您不愿承认。

对不对？

BTW, 我其实也蛮忙的。:)
 
hi, chris, i will be getting off soon. so will not be able to post any reply for a quite while. i do not usually have time at home poking around forums. i have a wife to pacify, multiple children to entertain. have a good day.
 
您必须登录或注册才可回复。
后退
顶部