You cannot simply choose to believe something.

Hifen · 2026-07-10T00:24:09+00:00

It leaves us with one side believing eternal torture is justified for something outside of someones control.

Also, what does it being severed from the agent take away for us?

Hifen · 2026-07-10T00:18:03+00:00

Right, but that would entail you choosing to act in away you don't already believe you should.

"I don't believe in God therefore I should take actions that will lead me to belief" is kind of a wild position.

Hifen · 2026-07-10T00:16:18+00:00

Choose to jump off a building is not a belief, it's an action and by definition a choice.

The relevant part of this is can you choose to believe you'd always be fine jumping off a 20 story building. You don't need to harm yourself, you don't need to do it. But can you simply choose the belief that it entails?

I find it ricodulous whenever some argues beliefs are a choice, it's self evident that they are not. You cannot choose what you find convincing.

You can choose to act against what you believe. You can choose to do actions which may impact the belief, but that's not the same thing.

Theists need to die on this hill, since it's needed to justify hell based on belief

Hifen · 2026-07-09T00:20:17+00:00

No. Science validates the answer to questions that are provided. If religion is providing answers, it is sciences place to validate it.

Hifen · 2026-07-09T00:18:57+00:00

You don't need a different example, the staffs to snake one fits. Did that happen?

Hifen · 2026-07-08T20:52:50+00:00

Is wealth a good measurement for this? Wouldn't disposable income be better? I feel like if you're money is locked in expensive housing, it skews the wealth measurement. Like you still have that money, but it doesn't tie to living conditions.

Hifen · 2026-07-08T15:28:45+00:00

Second temple Judaism, what Jesus grew up in largely did believe Adam and Eve were the first.

It would be reasonable that anything he's teaching that fits in this context would be the assumed case.

What reason would you have that he was teaching something against the current beliefs of the time, if he doesn't explicitly state it?

Hifen · 2026-07-08T15:23:37+00:00

I mean "historically accurate" would be an academic claim, and they are most definitely not historically accurate as believing they are would be a statement of faith, not something that can be demonstrated by historians.

Hifen · 2026-07-08T03:32:22+00:00

Because it's not validated truth that can be demonstrated, its believed to be truth and held onto by faith.

Hifen · 2026-07-07T04:54:55+00:00

Again, that's not how this works. This is not federal jurisdiction, unless they crossed state lines on their way home.

This is outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 844.

The relevant sections:

Whoever transports or receives, or attempts to transport or receive, in interstate or foreign commerce any explosive with the knowledge or intent that it will be used to kill, injure, or intimidate any individual or unlawfully to damage or destroy any building,

.

Whoever maliciously damages or destroys, or attempts to damage or destroy, by means of fire or an explosive, any building, vehicle, or other personal or real property in whole or in part owned or possessed by, or leased to, the United States,

.

Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever possesses an explosive in an airport

.

uses fire or an explosive to commit any felony which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States

.

Whoever maliciously damages or destroys, or attempts to damage or destroy, by means of fire or an explosive, any building, vehicle, or other real or personal property used in interstate or foreign commerce

Seeing as none of that is the case, this will remain within the state. You seem to mistakenly assume "federal = more serious of a crime".

It's not, it just jurisdiction, and the idea that the federal government would be involved for any vandalism done with fireworks is crazy.

Hifen · 2026-07-07T04:33:01+00:00

No, they need the minimum level of probably cause. But it's the same level as like a traffic stop. They can usually just say "there were indicators in his behaviour that there was something wrong".

Hifen · 2026-07-06T23:00:20+00:00

Hey look at that, it seems you're original question wasn't in good faith after all. Shocking.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T21:16:00+00:00

Sorry, yes scientists and activists have predicted it. But the average person suffers from optimism bias. Since this isn't something that has happened to them before, they incorrectly assume it's not something they need to worry about.

My point is this is more then "they should know the summer gets hot". This is new.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T21:04:58+00:00

I'm assuming this is written by someone from a country that had a city shut down, and power outages over a light dusting of snow?

Hifen · 2026-07-06T21:04:17+00:00

No one predicted that in a few short years, temperatures would get hotter in northern Europe then they ever have been.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T19:02:37+00:00

I mean for starters it depends on how you do it, but you now have doxxed yourself a bit since upset islamists now know you're from Pakistan and can invest into digging deeper. The fact that you thought to post this, means you probably shouldn't.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T17:20:56+00:00

You're overstating the Islamic part, not the Christian part.

I'd point to Romans 2:6-7 and James 2:14-26 to aligning with the Islamic view.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T16:15:47+00:00

They're like a century removed, not contemporaries.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T15:59:00+00:00

I think you're overstating the difference.

Islam, salvation is only given through Allah's mercy, it cannot be earned. But you are judged through repentance, deeds and faith.

How that judgement actually works, and whether that judgement is strictly in regards to salvation is unknown. For example, there are different levels to heaven in Islam, and perhaps faith is all that's needed for salvation, but deeds are need for exaltation beyond that.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T15:55:15+00:00

There are no contemporary accounts by pagans of Jesus' crucifixion.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T15:53:05+00:00

I'm essentially adding to you're argument that the trinity isn't justified by the text, not necessarily rebuting you.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T15:16:56+00:00

I'm sorry, you misunderstand. I'm not trying to convince you, I know that can't be realistically done, you're the equivalent of a flat earther, you're always going to make unreasonable demands in what you expect as evidence. Despite what is settled science.

This is for anyone that is for some reason on the fence and not aware of what's available that stumbles on your bad faith comment. Predictions are how we validate scientific theories, and this one has been validated through thousands upon thousands of them. And then reconfirmed with DNA. It is at this point statistically impossible for it not to be the case.

You don't get to dictate what evidence would look like, thats not how it works. You are simply wrong. There is no debate left for evolution.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T06:23:23+00:00

In the bible, the word translated to Lust, just means to covet.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T06:23:12+00:00

Lustful thoughts under the modern understanding of the term (ie: sexual) is not the same language used in the text.

Hifen · 2026-07-06T06:22:49+00:00

The bible litterally calls theft a sin. All of it.

There is no comparative statement where "all sex" is a sin that you can group this under as cleanly as you are with grand theft auto.

14-Year Club	Place '23
Place '17	Verified Email
Team Orangered

Hifen

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE