Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Ask?? Why have this forum??
XTREAM FAITH
Junior Member (Idle past 5088 days)
Posts: 9
From: Muskogee, OK, US
Joined: 03-30-2010


Message 1 of 17 (553227)
04-02-2010 4:03 AM


I am new to this forum and I don't understand a couple things. So I decided to post this here in the coffee house so it hopefully will be "on topic" since here there is no defined topic. That really brings me to the point of this thread.
I do understand there are intense differences in belief structures such as spirituality, morals, politics and others here in this forum. This is the focus of this particular forum right? A place where we of different beliefs can debate, explain, argue, make friends, make enemy's, ect ect. My question is why ask? If you have a certain thread in a particular topic that leads with a question, why ask if you don't really want to find out other members opinions on it?
Take this for an instance. I ask a question and someone cites a example to make a point, I respond, a couple others join in and cite different examples to make their points. So, the topic of the thread remains the same its just the conversation that "evolves" lol. So why, when most of the questions asked are of opinions or perception of a subject, do they get shut down right when things are getting good on the basis of "getting off topic". When in reality they are not off topic they are very much on topic, but have moved deeper into the topic, jumping from example to example. If space isn't an issue and we have page after page why not?
I have my opinion and it will probably piss some off. It seems to me, at least with spiritual or Biblical topics, when a non-Christian cannot persuade a Christian or a Christian has made a point that cannot be proven wrong by a non-Christian, a suggestion is made to close the thread and it is done. I have seen posts edited by ADMIN's because they were "off topic". Why? Why ask then?? I could understand if members were doing nothing but cussing and arguing with each other, fine step in, close it down, let ppl cool down and move onto another subject. However, if there is a mature conversation taking place, citing legitimate examples and making points with no animosity why shut it down?
Look I have stated I am new here, I have only posted one reply to a post in a thread I was interested in and when I made a point that either the member didn't have an answer to or could not refute a suggestion was made to close the thread on the basis that it was now "off topic". An Admin jumped in and closed it down. I read through the posts and though it wandered a bit here and there but I believe for the most part it was very much on topic.
* I am not picking a fight, I am just making a point*
In reading other threads this seems to be a recurring trend in this forum. Why have a forum if your not going to allow debates to continue or give one side, usually the same non-Christian side, an easy way out of a discussion by just closing down a thread?
I would love to here some opinions on this from both sides of the membership and from the Admins. If I am way off base please let me know, I am able to admit if I am wrong. If some of you feel the same speak up.
GO IN PEACE
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Blank lines between paragraphs.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminSlev, posted 04-02-2010 4:21 AM XTREAM FAITH has replied
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 04-02-2010 5:31 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied
 Message 6 by AdminPD, posted 04-02-2010 6:03 AM XTREAM FAITH has replied
 Message 8 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-02-2010 9:12 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied

  
AdminSlev
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 03-28-2010


Message 2 of 17 (553228)
04-02-2010 4:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 4:03 AM


Do you have a concrete example of this ??
The Admin team is trying to do their best, and so positive criticism such as this is welcome.
However I've been for almost a year now (been assigned as admin only recently), and have very seldom seen anything like you are describing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 4:03 AM XTREAM FAITH has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 5:21 AM AdminSlev has not replied

  
XTREAM FAITH
Junior Member (Idle past 5088 days)
Posts: 9
From: Muskogee, OK, US
Joined: 03-30-2010


Message 3 of 17 (553230)
04-02-2010 5:21 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminSlev
04-02-2010 4:21 AM


Bible Study/ Define literal vs non-literal message 243-271. I understand that the OT was about rules around whats to be taken literally. But as I said above threads evolve citing different examples based on the same topic, which I believe took place. Did I miss something in the rules where just because an originator of a thread clarifies his thoughts the whole thread gets shut down? I know the Admin said he would open it back up if anyone asked but it seems pretty weird to just drop a thread on a suggestion when so many are active in a debate.
On a side note- JMO but the whole the OT itself is a rhetorical question. Its just like if Rahm Emanuel wrote a book with 2 parts 1. the history of the progressive era 2. The life of Obama. If Rahm described the progressive era from the 1890's-1920's would there be rules around how to take his writings? If he wrote about the life of Obama and referred to the passing of the health care bill as a miracle are there rules to whats to be taken literaly?
I said that to say this. There are no rules everyone knows that its the Bible is a account of events both past present and future. It has to do with belief. We all know that. Do you believe Obama passing health care was a miracle? Most all of these threads in the Bible study section are based around that, shoot most of the threads in this whole forum are based around if you believe or not. So if a rhetorical question like the OT was in my opinion evolves to if Paul was referring to Jesus as a literal person or a mythical person from another realm or whatever the position, as long as it stays on topic of literal or non-literal does it matter?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminSlev, posted 04-02-2010 4:21 AM AdminSlev has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by cavediver, posted 04-02-2010 5:32 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied
 Message 7 by purpledawn, posted 04-02-2010 6:11 AM XTREAM FAITH has replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(1)
Message 4 of 17 (553231)
04-02-2010 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 4:03 AM


That is what the coffee house is for: however, as this is a debate forum with points being backed up with evidence or reasoned argument not using that style can pull threads way off track.
It used to be that there was a hard code post limit to threads and after 300 posts the thread would close and so this led to a need to be specific and to the point.
Although that is no longer true it is still the culture of this board.
In coffee house you can jump around the discussion much more freely but not in the normal threads.
Look at it this way: imgine if you were giving a presentation about a subject that was really important to you but people kept asking irrelevant questions: how much of that could anyone take.
That's what happens here; we stay on topic as best as we can.
One to look out for is when someone starts a thread about ID but then goes on about evolution and nothing else. Or starts. Topic about evolution but goes off on a tangent a out abiogenesis.
Do you have a link to the post that made you feel this way?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 4:03 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 5 of 17 (553232)
04-02-2010 5:32 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 5:21 AM


So if a rhetorical question like the OT was in my opinion evolves to if Paul was referring to Jesus as a literal person or a mythical person from another realm or whatever the position, as long as it stays on topic of literal or non-literal does it matter?
You do realise that all you need to do is propose a topic on "Was Paul referring to Jesus as a literal person or a mythical person". In all the time you've spent complaining, it could have been proposed, promoted, and debate could be under way. It's a good topic, and does deserve a thread of its own.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 5:21 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


(1)
Message 6 of 17 (553233)
04-02-2010 6:03 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 4:03 AM


Rules of the Board
Welcome to EvC.
The owner of this board has a set of rules he wishes members to abide by.
Rule #2 is "Please stay on topic for a thread. Open a new thread for new topics."
Admin can explain why he wants that rule.
quote:
Look I have stated I am new here, I have only posted one reply to a post in a thread I was interested in and when I made a point that either the member didn't have an answer to or could not refute a suggestion was made to close the thread on the basis that it was now "off topic". An Admin jumped in and closed it down. I read through the posts and though it wandered a bit here and there but I believe for the most part it was very much on topic.
The closing had nothing to do with you personally or Christian vs Non-Christian. I don't play favorites. I had posted several warnings in that thread concerning the topic. The opening post is always the guideline. Trust me, no one likes having their thread redirected by participants.
Opening Post
There are many occasions when reading through the threads here that I come across this sentence:
"Well that's obviously not to be taken literally - it was just a dream/song/interpretation that had at the time"
When reading the bible, what are the rules around what is to be taken literally, and what is not?
Are there any rules?
The thread, Define literal vs non-literal., was about methods of interpretation, not about whether Jesus was real or not. That's more of an accuracy and inerrancy issue. Whether he was written as a literal person or not, was a stretch but if tied in with interpretation rules; it might have flown. I tried but they wouldn't go for it. The rule is, if you don't want to stay on topic, start a new thread. If someone wants to discuss an issue bad enough, they will start a new thread.
Were you interested in the post because of the opening post or because of the discussion around Paul's writings and whether Jesus was a real person or not?
Theodoric had already been warned that his line of discussion was off topic, so he would not have responded to your post.
The discussion around Paul had nothing to do with the topic and I couldn't get participants to tie it back to the topic. The originator's request to close the thread confirmed that that line of discussion was off topic. Since earlier warnings and nudges hadn't worked, I felt closure was necessary to get everyone's attention.
My Admin message gave people the opportunity to make a request to reopen the thread, but it still had to be on topic with the opening post. The discussion of Jesus wasn't.
If you want to start a new topic about whether the Gospels or Paul portray Jesus as a literal person, then go for it. There's nothing stopping you. I'm sure Theodoric will jump right in. Make your proposal in the Proposed New Topics thread. I have no problem promoting such a topic if the OP is written well. Your OP is what helps Admins determine when someone is off topic.
If your topic is whether the Gospels or Paul portrayed Jesus as a literal person, then discussion of whether Jesus existed in real life is off topic because you specified how he was portrayed in the Gospels or Paul. This would be more of a Bible Study forum topic.
If your topic is whether Jesus existed in real life, then how he was portrayed in the Gospels and Paul is not necessarily off topic; but probably not concrete evidence. This would be an accuracy and inerrancy forum topic if you want evidence from outside the Bible, as well as Biblical evidence. It is a science forum so evidence outside the Bible is necessary. If you're not particular about the evidence, then the Bible Study forum is a good choice.
So the option is yours. Make a new thread if you wish to discuss the reality of Jesus (or how he was written) or ask for the old thread to be reopened if you wish to stay on topic with the opening post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 4:03 AM XTREAM FAITH has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 2:33 PM AdminPD has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3456 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 7 of 17 (553234)
04-02-2010 6:11 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 5:21 AM


Title or Topic
quote:
...as long as it stays on topic of literal or non-literal does it matter?
Understand the difference between the title and the argument or question addressed in the opening post.
The title gets your attention and gives one an idea of what's in the thread.
The opening post sets the parameters of the argument. It provides the question or position being addressed. It defines the topic.
The title is not the argument. We argue the topic, not the title.
Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 5:21 AM XTREAM FAITH has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 2:36 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 17 (553244)
04-02-2010 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 4:03 AM


It seems to me, at least with spiritual or Biblical topics, when a non-Christian cannot persuade a Christian or a Christian has made a point that cannot be proven wrong by a non-Christian, a suggestion is made to close the thread and it is done. I have seen posts edited by ADMIN's because they were "off topic". Why? Why ask then?? I could understand if members were doing nothing but cussing and arguing with each other, fine step in, close it down, let ppl cool down and move onto another subject. However, if there is a mature conversation taking place, citing legitimate examples and making points with no animosity why shut it down?
Because without moderators, a thread will spiral in to terminal decay. We've seen it a million times. To really appreciate how often a subject gets derailed, hang around a bit more and it will become very evident.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 4:03 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied

  
XTREAM FAITH
Junior Member (Idle past 5088 days)
Posts: 9
From: Muskogee, OK, US
Joined: 03-30-2010


Message 9 of 17 (553284)
04-02-2010 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by AdminPD
04-02-2010 6:03 AM


Re: Rules of the Board
Thanks for you reply and I will take you at your word regarding the Christian Vs non-Christian argument. I still have issues with the "on topic" rule in this thread. The Originator did not define an example he left it wide open to the Bible in general. Others such as Purple dawn and peg took it to Genesis 1. However Killinghurts also stated:
"The facts also tell us
- You cannot turn water into wine.
- There was no global flood.
- You cannot walk on water.
- You cannot part a sea with a wooden staff.
Are these now to be take non-literally?
Please reply."
and
"Now you tell me that I *should* take other events that do *not* line up with the facts (and that you have described as miraculous) to be literal.
Wouldn't it make more sense to describe those as not literal too?
Awaiting your reply."
Which seems to me he left the discussion wide open to the entire Bible and not just Genesis 1.
"My Admin message gave people the opportunity to make a request to reopen the thread, but it still had to be on topic with the opening post. The discussion of Jesus wasn't."
It was not a discussion of Jesus and his existence but a discussion of Paul's writings and the literal or non-literal interpretation of them.
"The thread, Define literal vs non-literal., was about methods of interpretation, not about whether Jesus was real or not"
My point exactly! This was a discussion of how we were to interpret Paul's writings and if he portrayed Jesus in a literal or non-literal context, so it is "on topic" for the thread and "on topic" for the forum. The discussion was not if he existed in real life, you are just merging the two. I could do that with the Genesis account or miracles as well on the basis of whether or not the events ever took place. What is the difference between debating Paul's writings as literal or non-literal vs miracle accounts or the creation account. Its all a debate over the topic just citing different examples. So why should I have to start another thread based on the literal or non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings when that is what this thread was about.
This brings me back to my original question which is Why Ask? and Why have the forum? If you are going to only allow the first example cited to rule the thread and not allow the discussion to evolve and use other examples to make a point, why even have the discussion? Isn't that the whole theme of a forum, to have other people bring in their take on any one topic and debate it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AdminPD, posted 04-02-2010 6:03 AM AdminPD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by AdminPD, posted 04-02-2010 3:59 PM XTREAM FAITH has replied

  
XTREAM FAITH
Junior Member (Idle past 5088 days)
Posts: 9
From: Muskogee, OK, US
Joined: 03-30-2010


Message 10 of 17 (553286)
04-02-2010 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by purpledawn
04-02-2010 6:11 AM


Re: Title or Topic
The context of that WHOLE statement was debating the topic not the title. Thanks, I do know the difference between a title and a topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by purpledawn, posted 04-02-2010 6:11 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


(1)
Message 11 of 17 (553297)
04-02-2010 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 2:33 PM


Re: Rules of the Board
Rule #1: Follow all moderator requests.
Read the opening post of the thread.
The originator was speaking of methods in determining what is to be taken or read literally and what isn't. He clarified his point just before I closed the thread.
No it wasn't confined to Genesis and that wasn't the issue with the Jesus discussion.
quote:
So why should I have to start another thread based on the literal or non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings when that is what this thread was about.
Then make a case for reopening the thread. The choice is yours, but what you were presenting did not really deal with literal or non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings. If you feel it did then make your case. In your Message 257 you stated:
XTREAM FAITH writes:
Jesus did exist in his time. After Jesus died Saul who we now know as Paul was executing the believers of Jesus "Christians". The writings of Paul make this very clear.
XTREAM FAITH writes:
So Theodoric in fact the Gospels do portray Jesus as a literal person and so do the writings of Paul, which do mention the happenings in the Gospels which did exist in his time.
Theodoric made it very clear he wanted to discuss a mythical Jesus.
Theodoric writes:
It is a well researched book on the case for a mythical Jesus. Since this is not the topic I will not be discussing it further in this thread.
Now read the originators comments in Message 264. It is about rules of interpretation. Just as he asked in the OP.
When reading the bible, what are the rules around what is to be taken literally, and what is not?
The discussion concerning Jesus wasn't dealing with interpretation issues. It was dealing more with belief, outside info, etc.
quote:
My point exactly! This was a discussion of how we were to interpret Paul's writings and if he portrayed Jesus in a literal or non-literal context, so it is "on topic" for the thread and "on topic" for the forum. The discussion was not if he existed in real life, you are just merging the two. I could do that with the Genesis account or miracles as well on the basis of whether or not the events ever took place. What is the difference between debating Paul's writings as literal or non-literal vs miracle accounts or the creation account. Its all a debate over the topic just citing different examples. So why should I have to start another thread based on the literal or non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings when that is what this thread was about.
"Portraying Jesus in a literal or non-literal context" equates to existence in real life. That has nothing to do with how Paul wrote or the topic.
So make your case right now. Me and you only. What verses were being misunderstood and what method of interpretation should be used to understand Paul's writings. What are the rules? Is there really an issue when reading Paul's letters that Jesus wasn't understood to be a man by Paul's audience? Forget Theodoric. Show me the interpretation conflicts.
quote:
This brings me back to my original question which is Why Ask? and Why have the forum? If you are going to only allow the first example cited to rule the thread and not allow the discussion to evolve and use other examples to make a point, why even have the discussion? Isn't that the whole theme of a forum, to have other people bring in their take on any one topic and debate it?
One's take on the topic has to fall within the parameters of the argument presented in the opening post. This one dealt with methods, not a specific example. The way Jesus was being discussed did not fit the topic. Just because you use the word literal doesn't mean it's on topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 2:33 PM XTREAM FAITH has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 9:22 PM AdminPD has not replied
 Message 13 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 9:22 PM AdminPD has replied

  
XTREAM FAITH
Junior Member (Idle past 5088 days)
Posts: 9
From: Muskogee, OK, US
Joined: 03-30-2010


Message 12 of 17 (553366)
04-02-2010 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by AdminPD
04-02-2010 3:59 PM


Re: Rules of the Board
Double Post
Edited by AdminPD, : Double Post

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by AdminPD, posted 04-02-2010 3:59 PM AdminPD has not replied

  
XTREAM FAITH
Junior Member (Idle past 5088 days)
Posts: 9
From: Muskogee, OK, US
Joined: 03-30-2010


Message 13 of 17 (553367)
04-02-2010 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by AdminPD
04-02-2010 3:59 PM


Re: Rules of the Board
LOL!!
"The discussion concerning Jesus wasn't dealing with interpretation issues. It was dealing more with belief, outside info, etc."
Well that's just it isn't it, Interpretation! Yes my discussion did deal with interpretation issues. However once again I will restate my point. There are no rules for interpretation. Especially when you are dealing with a book like the Bible. Theodoric did not assign any one particular verse. Did he need to? His "INTERPRETATION" of Paul's writings were that he was referring to a mythical Jesus. My interpretation of Paul's writings were that he was referring to a literal Jesus, one that lived and breathed at the same time as Paul. Since you want to pick pieces of my post to try and prove your point I'll post the whole thing once again so you don't get the wrong "INTERPRETATION" of what I wrote.
* I will add notes in parenthesis to help you out*
"How can you make assumptions about Paul and his writings when you have not read them. To SAY that he was talking about a "Jesus that exists in another realm" ( non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings)??? Jesus did exist in his time (my interpretation). After Jesus died Saul who we now know as Paul was executing the believers of Jesus "Christians". The writings of Paul make this very clear (my interpretation as literal). They even go as far as Showing Paul eating with the Disciples. You can find this in Galatians 2:11-21. In these verses it should clear up two things for you (citing an example of Paul's writings showing method and context to validate my interpretation).
1. Paul did live in the time of Jesus he was eating with the same ppl who walked with him. Showing that he was eating and talking to Peter and Barnabas, both Disciples of Jesus.(showing that the scripture established the time line that proves Jesus was alive the same time Paul was *not that he existed*)
2. Paul knew Jesus as a real man not a "Other worldly Son of Man". Seeing that in verse 21 he states that if righteousness could be gained by law Christ "DIED" for nothing.( showing that Paul understood and was teaching Jesus as a physical deity not a mythical deity*not proving he existed but that he understood Jesus as God on earth)
Why would he say that Christ had died if he did not live(question concerning non-literal interpretation)? Why would he be eating and in fact in this passage be correcting a Disciple if he did not live in the same time frame of Jesus( question concerning non-literal interpretation)?
So Theodoric in fact the Gospels do portray Jesus as a literal person and so do the writings of Paul, which do mention the happenings in the Gospels which did exist in his time." (my interpretation of the Gospels and Paul's writings concerning the era and time line they were written)
Now I thought that under the proposed topic those notes would not be necessary, but since you called me out "So make your case right now. Me and you only." I figured I would help you out. Look your an intelligent person. You know as well as I do that killinghurts asked a rhetorical question for the basis of this topic. If he was truly ignorant to the fact that there are no rules to a personal interpretation of any literary work then he soon learned the answer to his question quickly.
killinghurts:
"I'd suggest closing this topic now.
There are clearly no well defined rules for what is to be taken literally and what is not."
So this brings me to your point.
"The discussion concerning Jesus wasn't dealing with interpretation issues. It was dealing more with belief, outside info, etc."
If there are no well defined rules for what is to be taken literally and what is not, belief in the literary work could and would play a part in interpretation. So there is no way you can separate the two when having this discussion with believers and non-believers. That is the ultimate problem. Especially when you are discussing interpretation of the Bible with believers and non-believers. The non-believer will look for factual evidence where a believer may just rely on faith.
In one sentence I will answer your last question.
"Show me the interpretation conflicts."
Answer:
Belief in the literary work is THE interpretation issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by AdminPD, posted 04-02-2010 3:59 PM AdminPD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by AdminPD, posted 04-02-2010 9:58 PM XTREAM FAITH has replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 14 of 17 (553369)
04-02-2010 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by XTREAM FAITH
04-02-2010 9:22 PM


Understood
Understood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-02-2010 9:22 PM XTREAM FAITH has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by XTREAM FAITH, posted 04-03-2010 12:53 AM AdminPD has replied

  
XTREAM FAITH
Junior Member (Idle past 5088 days)
Posts: 9
From: Muskogee, OK, US
Joined: 03-30-2010


Message 15 of 17 (553391)
04-03-2010 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by AdminPD
04-02-2010 9:58 PM


Re: Understood
All that aside I have one question.
In only the Social and Religious Issues forums are you as administrators asking me and others to separate our belief and faith, that the Bible is the living word of God, from the topic when interacting in the debate?
That was the main reason for this thread. If I am to enter into debate but required to leave my belief and faith at the door, to me their is no reason to enter into the discussion. Hence the title to this thread. There are sides to these debates. One side on this forum has no belief structure that is attached to the Bible whatsoever, another is neutral and the last is so deeply intertwined that it cannot be separated. I am of the latter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by AdminPD, posted 04-02-2010 9:58 PM AdminPD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by AdminPD, posted 04-03-2010 3:37 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied
 Message 17 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-03-2010 4:18 AM XTREAM FAITH has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024