Anti John 3:16

[Skeptical Greg]

Quote:

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


.....................................


If you don't know the definition of 'reasonable' you'll need to consult a dictionary.

The question is not what reasonable means, but why the murder of innocents is reasonable to you..

You haven't answered that yet..

[aerosolben]

Quote:

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
Yes. And I've already said that I consider the 'we cannot possibly understand god of its thoughs/actions, if such a god exists' explanation as reasonable.

What, am I chopped liver? I explained why that isn't a reasonable explanation.

[T'ai Chi]

Quote:

Originally posted by slimshady2357

So then, I would guess you would say that "God was taking a dump that day" is a reasonable explanation for the question "Why does God allow little children to die in natural disasters?". As I asked before, is that accurate?

I have no idea what you mean by "taking a dump". If you could be more specific, that would be great.

Quote:

Yes, because those apologetics are not reasonable, so they asked for explanations as to why you think they are reasonable, something you continue to avoid answering.

I've answered. You are being irrational for continual demanding of an answer when one has been given.

Quote:

I know what definition I would use But who can tell what one you are using...

There is a standard definition of reasonable. Use that one.

Quote:

you refuse to give any explanation yourself as to why you think a particular explanation is reasonable or not.

My opinion.

Quote:

As I said, it seems that to you any explanation at all is reasonable.

Nope. I already posted the explanation I think is reasonable:

"Yes. And I've already said that I consider the 'we cannot possibly understand god of its thoughs/actions, if such a god exists' explanation as reasonable."

I don't know if it is true or not, but it seems reasonable, assuming god(s) exist.

Quote:

Since you refuse to comment or back up your claim in any way what-so-ever,

See above.

Quote:

I'll assume from now on that any explanation of any sort is 'reasonable' for you. Which means that the definition of reasonable you employ is totally vacuous.

See above.

Quote:

I'll remember that you believe such nonesense when reading you in the future

I'll remember I still don't give a s&it about your strawmen.

[Stereolab]

I hate to admit this, because DangerousBeliefs ticked me off in another thread, but I find this idea hilarious. The idea of someone holding up a sign at a sports game with some obscure Bible passage...people figure it's something about the love of God, but in actuality it's about getting drunk with harlots or something...I don't care what your religious convictions are, that's just funny.

[T'ai Chi]

Quote:

Originally posted by Diogenes

The question is not what reasonable means, but why the murder of innocents is reasonable to you..

You haven't answered that yet..

It seems reasonable to me because my definition of reasonable matches the dictionary definition of reasonable, obviously.

You still haven't understood that yet...

Let it also be noted that, according to some apologetic sites, they don't think it was murder (killing yes, but not murder), or that the people were innocent (sin and all). Again... "according to the sites", not me.

Cheers

[T'ai Chi]

Quote:

Originally posted by aerosolben

What, am I chopped liver? I explained why that isn't a reasonable explanation.

Quote:

Explanation is "the act of clearing from obscurity and making intelligible". I don't think this qualifies. Your explanation has not provided us with any insight for a given quote;

Not my explanation, a common apologetic explanation. I do not own it or necessarily believe it.

Take any quote. Then realize that you might not be able to understand it in human terms (as you think you do) because you aren't smart enough (your hardware is necessarily limited) to understand the multidimensional creator of the universe, its actions, purposes, and methods (if one exists that is).

[Skeptical Greg]

Quote:

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


Not my explanation, a common apologetic explanation. I do not own it or necessarily believe it.

Take any quote. Then realize that you might not be able to understand it in human terms (as you think you do) because you aren't smart enough (your hardware is necessarily limited) to understand the multidimensional creator of the universe, its actions, purposes, and methods (if one exists that is).

But many people ( some with the reasonable explanations you subscribe to ) who say we cannot understand God, say we must know him in order to be saved from eternal torture. Explain how it is reasonable to demand that someone know you, while remaining un-understandable..

[T'ai Chi]

Quote:

Originally posted by Diogenes

But many people ( some with the reasonable explanations you subscribe to ) who say we cannot understand God, say we must know him in order to be saved from eternal torture. Explain how it is reasonable to demand that someone know you, while remaining un-understandable..

Heck if I know! Good question. I'm neither an apologetic Christian or a Christian, so you'd have to ask them.

Let us know what they say.

I'm sure you could Google search and find some reasonable apologetic material on that topic though..