"A free thinker is Satan's slave"

[Dragon]

Sorry kg, but you don't get to have it both ways, either. I'd like to see a quote of Dragon saying liberty cannot exist without punishment.

She actually said I said that liberty can't exist WITH punishment, not without.

Of course, I didn't say that. I said something much more specific: that when a governing authority (whether it be an actual government, or a church or religious tradition) threatens people with punishment for not believing certain things, that is antithetical to liberty.

 

[Newby]

What does it matter to you what I believe?

Only the fact that you're trying to make a point of it.

Are you going to answer the question or retract your demand that I prove you believe it? You really should do one or the other.

I've never 'made a point' of what I believe at all, I've only questioned the assumptions that you make about Christians being able to think freely. You're the one that has inferred all kinds of things on my part, without any proof whatsoever I might add.

 

[Newby]

What does it matter to you what I believe?

Only the fact that you're trying to make a point of it.

Are you going to answer the question or retract your demand that I prove you believe it? You really should do one or the other.

I also didn't ask you to prove that I believe anything. I asked you to show where I had made any statement about what God is like.

 

[Newby]

I get the feeling that Dragon is very young, and very confused.

No, you don't.

Now I don't know what I feel either... too funny...

 

[Newby]

Why would those who laugh at Christ on the cross, who spit on God, enjoy his company in the hereafter?

You reject him here, he rejects you there.

But I do not reject God. I reject traditional Christianity, and I reject what traditional Christians SAY about God. There is a difference, and when traditional Christians confuse the two, they are exhibiting an insufferable degree of arrogance.

But 'traditional Christians', whatever that means, don't 'say' anything about God, the Bible, which is the basis of belief for every Christian, is what tells you about God and the nature of God. You can believe it or not, no one can force you to believe anything.

 

[Dragon]

I get the feeling that Dragon is very young, and very confused.

No, you don't.

Now I don't know what I feel either... too funny...

Of course you know. You're just lying. You've already made it clear that you consider all truth to be "subjective," and that you feel perfectly justified in saying anything to make a point without any respect for honesty whatsoever. The claim that you actually believe I am either young or confused is without credibility, as are you, and therefore the most likely conclusion is that this is NOT what you believe.

And it's not.

 

[koshergrl]

Sorry kg, but you don't get to have it both ways, either. I'd like to see a quote of Dragon saying liberty cannot exist without punishment.

She actually said I said that liberty can't exist WITH punishment, not without.

Of course, I didn't say that. I said something much more specific: that when a governing authority (whether it be an actual government, or a church or religious tradition) threatens people with punishment for not believing certain things, that is antithetical to liberty.

Dragon said liberty cannot exist in a Christian world because we believe in Hell.

I never said he said liberty can't exist without punishment. Liberty can't exist without punishment. Montrovant is mistaken.

 

[Dragon]

But 'traditional Christians', whatever that means, don't 'say' anything about God

If you pretend not to know what traditional Christians are, you cannot at the same time pretend to know what they do or do not say about God. If you're going to lie, you need to work at being consistent in your stories.

the Bible, which is the basis of belief for every Christian

Not every Christian believes in Biblical infallibility.

 

[koshergrl]

How is that an indictment? If it's true, it's true. Whether there is the threat of hell or not really has nothing to do with the truth of Christianity by itself.

The "truth" of Christianity is not under discussion, at least not directly. What I'm saying on this thread is that traditional Christianity is anti-liberty. It is opposed to people using their brains freely and drawing logical conclusions. It attempts to put the mind in shackles.

Indirectly, one might argue, and I do, that putting the mind in shackles is hardly the way to find the truth. And one might argue that a religion which paints God as an abominable tyrant is very, very unlikely to be true.

Be that as it may, though, traditional Christianity is a religion that has no use for freedom, and that is the point I'm making here.

He also explains that the concept of Hell means there can be no liberty.

I know, it sounds crazy..because of course, it is. He thinks his craziness is evidence of his superior intellect, but it's all muddy and unsupported nonsense thinking.

 

[Dragon]

I've never 'made a point' of what I believe at all, I've only questioned the assumptions that you make about Christians being able to think freely.

I have expressed no assumptions about Christians being able to think freely. I have expressed logical conclusions (not assumptions) about dogmatists -- which includes a certain subset of Christians that I have called "traditional" -- and whether they are able (and more important, willing) to think freely.

Either you are yourself a dogmatist or you are not. If you are, you have been answered. If not, your own views are irrelevant, and your bringing the subject up is only a diversion.

 

[Newby]

No, you don't.

Now I don't know what I feel either... too funny...

Of course you know. You're just lying. You've already made it clear that you consider all truth to be "subjective," and that you feel perfectly justified in saying anything to make a point without any respect for honesty whatsoever. The claim that you actually believe I am either young or confused is without credibility, as are you, and therefore the most likely conclusion is that this is NOT what you believe.

And it's not.

Now I definitely know you're confused. First you tell me I don't know, and then you tell me that of course I know. Make up your mind already.

When did I 'make it clear' that all truth is subjective?

My claim that you are young and confused is based off of the lack of maturity in your posts and the fact that you make erroneous comments about what people have said, when they haven't said anything of the sort. If you're not young, then you have my sympathies.

 

[koshergrl]

He never varies from his MO.

"If I say it, it stands on its own.
My assumptions are "logic" and therefore unassailable.
I cannot be bothered to post links, quotes, or facts to support what I say...I say it, it must therefore be accepted as TRUTH.
If you question me, I will not answer.
If you show me to be lying, your point of view is irrelevant."

Fifth grade crap. If that.

 

[Newby]

But 'traditional Christians', whatever that means, don't 'say' anything about God

If you pretend not to know what traditional Christians are, you cannot at the same time pretend to know what they do or do not say about God. If you're going to lie, you need to work at being consistent in your stories.

the Bible, which is the basis of belief for every Christian

Not every Christian believes in Biblical infallibility.

Who knows what your definition of 'traditional' christian is, I've tried to get it out of you once, but you won't commit to how you define it.

And if you don't believe what the Bible says, then there's no point to being a Christian, it's a pretty simple concept.

 

[Dragon]

Now I definitely know you're confused. First you tell me I don't know, and then you tell me that of course I know.

I never told you that you don't know. I'd think you were confused, except that I know you're lying instead.

 

[koshergrl]

He's lying.

And I don't think he's young, I think he's just ignorant, and too stubborn and lazy to learn.

 

[Dragon]

Who knows what your definition of 'traditional' christian is, I've tried to get it out of you once, but you won't commit to how you define it.

Most people here have no difficulty with the concept, and you're only pretending to. In any case, it's irrelevant to the point. IF you are going to pretend not to know what a traditional Christian is, THEN you must (for consistency) also pretend not to know what they do or do not say about God. To claim that they don't say anything about God, while also claiming that you don't know what I mean by the term, is to contradict yourself.

And if you don't believe what the Bible says, then there's no point to being a Christian, it's a pretty simple concept.

Many people who call themselves Christians disagree with you.

 

[Newby]

I've never 'made a point' of what I believe at all, I've only questioned the assumptions that you make about Christians being able to think freely.

I have expressed no assumptions about Christians being able to think freely. I have expressed logical conclusions (not assumptions) about dogmatists -- which includes a certain subset of Christians that I have called "traditional" -- and whether they are able (and more important, willing) to think freely.

Either you are yourself a dogmatist or you are not. If you are, you have been answered. If not, your own views are irrelevant, and your bringing the subject up is only a diversion.

So now it's only a certain 'subset' of Christians that can't think freely? Can you tell us what differentiates the christians who can think freely from those who can't? And your 'logical conclusions' are assumptions to me.

 

[G.T.]

Now I don't know what I feel either... too funny...

Of course you know. You're just lying. You've already made it clear that you consider all truth to be "subjective," and that you feel perfectly justified in saying anything to make a point without any respect for honesty whatsoever. The claim that you actually believe I am either young or confused is without credibility, as are you, and therefore the most likely conclusion is that this is NOT what you believe.

And it's not.

Now I definitely know you're confused. First you tell me I don't know, and then you tell me that of course I know. Make up your mind already.

When did I 'make it clear' that all truth is subjective?

My claim that you are young and confused is based off of the lack of mauturity in your posts and the fact that you make eroneous comments about what people have said, when they haven't said anything of the sort. If you're not young, then you have my sympathies.

You def. just lied.

When you quoted his "no you dont" he was clearly in that post referring to where you said that you feel he's young and confused, it wasn't about the same thing. Nice try though.

 

[koshergrl]

Newby doesn't lie.

Dragon does. And when he's caught, he declares the topic closed.

 

[Dragon]

So now it's only a certain 'subset' of Christians that can't think freely?

No, FROM THE BEGINNING that's what I said. Nothing has changed, except the lies you happen to be using at the moment.

Can you tell us what differentiates the christians who can think freely from those who can't?

I already did, repeatedly. I'd repeat myself again, except that I know you're only pretending not to understand.