|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
GDR writes: With this in mind we have to look for another explanation rather that the plain reading. And you do that in order to maintain a false belief. Just like you find another explanation for why Jesus didn't return within a generation after he was killed. The plain text tells you what happened. You don't like what it says, so you invent another reading of it.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
And you do that in order to maintain a false belief. Just like you find another explanation for why Jesus didn't return within a generation after he was killed. The plain text tells you what happened. You don't like what it says, so you invent another reading of it. I dont see how it matters. People claim that the Bible was made up anyway, so what difference does it make who comments or adds to the plain reading? How could we say that adding commentary and interpretation is a false belief? Are you suggesting that sticking to plain textual interpretation is the only "true" belief? If so, what is it that the plain text teaches us to believe? How does that differ from what GDR thinks we should believe? Edited by Phat, : subtitleChance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
GDR writes:
I'm fine with that. It's what the text says. If the text doesn't support your theology, you should change your theology, not mangle the text.
The thing is though that in reading it that way we then have to reject the idea that Jesus perfectly embodied the nature of God. GDR writes:
But it's completely compatible with the Old Testament and Jesus affirmed the Old Testament.
A plain reading of the teaching of what we have from Jesus throughout the Gospels, and the Epistles for that matter, show that such an action would be completely foreign to the nature of God. GDR writes:
If the text doesn't support your theology, you should change your theology, not mangle the text. With this in mind we have to look for another explanation rather that the plain reading.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
Surely you can figure that out for yourself. Long John Silver was made up but that doesn't give the reader leeway to believe that he escaped by flying saucer.
People claim that the Bible was made up anyway, so what difference does it make who comments or adds to the plain reading? Phat writes:
The Bible is the only source of your belief. If it wasn't for the Bible, you would never have heard of Jesus. You wouldn't know where the "communion" in your head was coming from. So throwing out the Bible leaves your belief on pretty shakey ground. Are you suggesting that sticking to plain textual interpretation is the only "true" belief?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
ringo writes: Shaky only in the context of hard evidence...which believers don't have anyway. We believe that the Word was the Word long before it was written down. We also believe that Jesus existed long before the Bible was even written. We dont believe that it would be impossible to hear of or know of Jesus without the book...there have been many global converts who were simply told the story. The Bible is the only source of your belief. If it wasn't for the Bible, you would never have heard of Jesus. You wouldn't know where the "communion" in your head was coming from. So throwing out the Bible leaves your belief on pretty shakey ground. Granted I can't prove any of this to your rigid critical thinking standards, but believers don't limit their understanding of God or Jesus to the book. My point is that belief is what people individually and collectively decide that it is. There is no standard based on the plain textual reading. Otherwise, the majority of the church would agree with jars warped theology that claims that the god character differed throughout the Bible and was often in need of human correction and that the snake told the truth. Obviously, the vast majority of Christians do not believe these things to be true. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
ringo,to GDR writes: Who says? It's what the text says. If the text doesn't support your theology, you should change your theology, not mangle the text.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
That's irrelevant. The only evidence you have of what the Word ever was is what is written down.
We believe that the Word was the Word long before it was written down. Phat writes:
Also irrelevant. The only evidence you have that He ever existed is what's written down.
We also believe that Jesus existed long before the Bible was even written. Phat writes:
They were told the story from the book. Unless you have better examples than that, your belief doesn't hold any water.
We dont believe that it would be impossible to hear of or know of Jesus without the book...there have been many global converts who were simply told the story. Phat writes:
That's the problem. Your belief is made up despite what the book says.
... believers don't limit their understanding of God or Jesus to the book. Phat writes:
That's the problem. Imagine what would happen if you just made up phone numbers, not limiting yourself to what the phone book actually says.
My point is that belief is what people individually and collectively decide that it is. Phat writes:
It's funny how you have to go through contortions to avoid the "warped" theology that's actually in the Bible.
Otherwise, the majority of the church would agree with jars warped theology... Phat writes:
I don't think that's obvious at all. Obviously, the vast majority of Christians do not believe these things to be true.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Anybody with any sense. Who says?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Your belief is made up despite what the book says.
So tell me this:Do you believe that the Book was made-up? Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Of course. Do you believe that the Book was made-up?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
If so, what difference does it make if the authors of an ancient book wrote down how they believed the story went? Granted it could be argued that they wrote the story, but my point is that there is no problem interpreting ones personal (or collective church) belief the way that one chooses. You bring up Long John Silver.
Wiki writes: People read the book for entertainment. In order to provide a proper analogy, if people read Long John Silver to determine the teaching and meaning from two Welsh brothers, it would be respectful to follow John Amrhein's original story to the letter. If, however, one simply believed in the legend of an opportunistic pirate, why not have poetic license to interpret such a character the way one wants? Give him a spaceship if you want to go there. Long John Silver, the parrot-wearing wooden-legged pirate of Robert Louis Stevenson's Treasure Island, was based on two Welsh brothers, a book claims. US author John Amrhein spent nine years researching the story of Owen and John Lloyd, born in Rhuddlan, Denbighshire, who emigrated to the West Indies.(...)Long John Silver is a cunning and opportunistic pirate who was quartermaster under the notorious Captain Flint. Long John Silver had a pet parrot called Captain Flint, often seen sitting on his shoulder where she would nibble on seeds.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
As I keep telling you, the book is the only concrete source of your belief. If you're just going to make it all up, you might as well call your messenger George.
If so, what difference does it make if the authors of an ancient book wrote down how they believed the story went? Phat writes:
Exactly. When dealing with Long John Silver, I don't deviate from the text. I don't make up my own pirate.
Granted it could be argued that they wrote the story, but my point is that there is no problem interpreting ones personal (or collective church) belief the way that one chooses. You bring up Long John Silver. Phat writes:
Maybe some day John Amrhein will write about the real person that the character Jesus was based on. In order to provide a proper analogy, if people read Long John Silver to determine the teaching and meaning from two Welsh brothers, it would be respectful to follow John Amrhein's original story to the letter. Until somebody brings up factual information about the real Jesus (if any), you have nothing but the actual story.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
OK, I'll give you that argument for a moment. Tell me what good anyone could gain through belief that
1) God is nothing more than a character in a book that is often in need of correction and is "learning on the job"? 2) God kills a man and his wife for not giving everything to the common good. 3) The snake told the truth. (and you mention that Satan is a plot device for how our own inner conscience works) If so, what's the point of plain textual belief and how does it differ in your mind from what Faith, GDR, and myself believe and what many of the apologists believe? Particularly GDR who says that Jesus is the word embodied as an example for us...which you seem to agree with except that you toss the envelope. In summation, you believe that it is the plain text message that we learn from and the evidence suggests nothing else...nor does the evidence suggest that there is any real benefit apart from selflessly helping our fellow man. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
What good can anybody gain through belief that God is perfect?
Tell me what good anyone could gain through belief that1) God is nothing more than a character in a book that is often in need of correction and is "learning on the job"? Phat writes:
You could learn that contributing all you can is for your own good - i.e. the common good is YOUR good.
2) God kills a man and his wife for not giving everything to the common good. Phat writes:
*shrug* It says what it says. The snake did tell the truth. You could learn not to make stuff up.
3) The snake told the truth. Phat writes:
As I've said, the text is the basis of your belief. If you're going to throw out the text and make up your own "saviour", you might as well call Him George. If so, what's the point of plain textual belief and how does it differ in your mind from what Faith, GDR, and myself believe and what many of the apologists believe?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Tangle writes:
It isn't that hard. If Jesus, as I believe, perfectly embodied the nature of God, then it is clear that there has to be another explanation other than accepting the plain text as written. I have simply come up with possible explanations. And you do that in order to maintain a false belief. Just like you find another explanation for why Jesus didn't return within a generation after he was killed. The plain text tells you what happened. You don't like what it says, so you invent another reading of it.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024