[jlisenbe]

It will take more to confirm it than your agreement.

the God of the Bible.

It makes eminent good sense to anyone rationally examining the issue. To those blinded by an unreasoning faith in bad religion, not so. Merely denying is not a compelling REASON not to believe it. You need more than that.

You are asking us to accept that your examination makes eminently good sense, yet you've not given anyone any good reason to agree with your views. Merely affirming is not a compelling REASON to accept it.

[Wondergirl]

So you don't accept his messages after all. At least you admit it. Only those which survive the journey through your liberal philosophies are accepted in your world.

I admit nothing! I said, "There is a message He taught that supersedes the obvious (literal) one you're hung up on." You can't read between the lines as to what Jesus was actually saying???

[jlisenbe]

Where does it say that? You are saying that Jesus was lying?

You would be well served to quit the silliness of the literal accusations. Every time a statement doesn't favor your preconceived ideas, it's always because someone took it too literally. It's just a ridiculous claim and it seems to indicate you really don't understand the concept.

[Wondergirl]

Where does it say that? You are saying that Jesus was lying?

Um, not at all!

You would be well served to quit the silliness of the literal accusations. Every time a statement doesn't favor your preconceived ideas, it's always because someone took it too literally. It's just a ridiculous claim and it seems to indicate you really don't understand the concept.

I made no literal accusation toward you. I said there's a literal message -- and there's a metaphorical one.

[Athos]

the God of the Bible.

Picking the God of the Bible with all his murderous activities and horrendous torture should tell you much about yourself. Sad to say, it's not pretty.

You are asking us to accept that your examination makes eminently good sense, yet you've not given anyone any good reason to agree with your views.

I am not asking you to accept anything. I am laying out for you the evolution of religion.

As for my "good reasons", they are presented as clearly as possible for you to ruminate and process them through your own mind, rather than simply offering a blanket denial.

Merely affirming is not a compelling REASON to accept it.

See the answer above.

Also, taking my comment on YOUR merely denying and turning it around is nothing more than a feeble trick when you lack cogent reasons of your own.

[Wondergirl]

Also, taking my comment on YOUR merely denying and turning it around is nothing more than a feeble trick when you lack cogent reasons of your own.

I'd love it if this thread had honest and interesting discussions about belief in God. Who is God? Where did He (She?) come from? Why do so many cultures believe in a God? Is He (She?) the same one for all?

[Athos]

I'd love it if this thread had honest and interesting discussions about belief in God.

It started that way, but it was soon hijacked by a "true believer".

[jlisenbe]

By someone who doesn't just accept everything you say. I learned from the Aquinas incident.

I'd love it if this thread had honest and interesting discussions about belief in God. Who is God? Where did He (She?) come from? Why do so many cultures believe in a God? Is He (She?) the same one for all?

Do you mean that to be taken literally?

[Wondergirl]

Do you mean that to be taken literally?

Honest and interesting discussions stem from "I" statements and questions, not accusatory "you" ones.

[jlisenbe]

I tell you what. I would prefer you have your I statements conversation with someone else. I don't like any discussion which is as evasive as this one has been. I much prefer speaking with someone who has the moral courage to state his/her honest convictions.

[Athos]

By someone who doesn't just accept everything you say. I learned from the Aquinas incident.

No one is required to "just accept everything I say". My posts are for all to read and reply if they want with reasoned discourse. Something you have notably failed to do, and for which you have been cited by more than one member of this website. Lacking a talent for anything but a knee-jerk reliance on your brand of Christianity, you don't contribute much to the discussion.

Your continued bringing up "the Aquinas incident" which is about two years old is a case in point. Besides the fact of it's being ancient history by now, it was clearly explained to you, but in your troll-like fervor to disagree with anything, you can't let go of it. Whenever you bring it up, it's a clear sign you have nothing intelligent to say.

[jlisenbe]

It's an example of you giving a partial quote to supposedly support a contention of yours. When the entire quote was provided, it plainly contradicted your belief. It was, shall we say, suspicious in the extreme. So when you make a statement, I don't just fall into lockstep like you expect. I don't mean that in an offensive manner. It's just how it is.

My "brand of Christianity" is to depend on what Jesus said. You plainly don't agree with that. That's your choice.

[Wondergirl]

I tell you what. I would prefer you have your I statements conversation with someone else. I don't like any discussion which is as evasive as this one has been. I much prefer speaking with someone who has the moral courage to state his/her honest convictions.

If you stop making every one of your responses derogatory toward others and agree to speak to the topic on the table, I will do my part as requested.

[jlisenbe]

If you stop making every one of your responses derogatory toward others

Like you just did? I think I'll pass on it. You have never done your part if you consider honest, forthright answers to be your part.

[Wondergirl]

Like you just did? I think I'll pass on it. You have never done your part if you consider honest, forthright answers to be your part.

Please read Matthew 6:14-15.

[jlisenbe]

Do you mean that literally?

This is what is tiresome. When you get in a corner, it's always an appeal to what someone else needs to do, someone else is mean, someone else is a literalist, someone else is using a proof text, and now it's someone else is not forgiving. Wow. You accept that statement of Christ, but not the ones you dislike. I can't handle that. I told you weeks ago that above all, you should be consistent in your beliefs. You are not.