Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,642 Year: 4,899/9,624 Month: 247/427 Week: 57/103 Day: 1/14 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


(2)
Message 166 of 566 (596472)
12-15-2010 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Taq
12-14-2010 12:51 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:
You clearly did not have an adequate education in the scriptures.
Taq writes:
Yes, I did. Knowing what scripture says is independent of believing what scripture says. They are two different things.
actually, i find that claimed belief in what the scripture says frequently gets in the way of knowing what scripture says. believers are so ready to betray the very thing they claim to cherish, just to get it to line up with their predetermined belief.
people who set out to know what the scriptures say are frequently very surprised that it does not accurately detail the beliefs they once had about those same scriptures.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Taq, posted 12-14-2010 12:51 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 3:43 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5974
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 167 of 566 (596476)
12-15-2010 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Dawn Bertot
12-14-2010 11:38 PM


Re: Please learn how to read, Dawn
I wrote the thread title genius, I should know what I am suggesting or asking for. If I didnt make it clear in the OP, I have now made it clear numerous other times
here it is again genius. Please provide in argument form a valid reason (not juist for Dawn, but anybody) why anyone should deconvert
Im telling you genius that is what the thread is about. Im the threadmaster
For your information Dawnette, I was the one trying in vain to break through your idiocy and inform you of that same thing, that the topic is not about trying to make Dawnette deconvert. Yet you kept demanding to be told what would make you personally deconvert.
Now suddenly you try to switch the tables and claim that I'm trying to make it only about you. That is a complete and utter lie!
And in the midst of committing that lie, you have the gall to return to making it about Dawnette deconverting: Message 150, 14-Dec-2010 8:30 PM:
well I have read it and studied it, so perhaps you could provide from one of them why I should become a non-believer
You are nothing but an unprincipled liar. Why don't you try to be man enough to own up to your actions? But, no, you are not man enough. You will just continue to try to hide your lies under even more lies, even though everybody can see what you are doing.
The decades I have tried to deal with creationists have left me with absolutely zero tolerance for liars.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-14-2010 11:38 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 4:09 AM dwise1 has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 168 of 566 (596483)
12-15-2010 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by arachnophilia
12-14-2010 11:58 PM


Re: scriptural unity
i'm not convinced. you seem to have come away with a severely colored interpretation; one that betrays a good portion of the text.
Paul and the other inspired NT writers disagree with you. Do you have knowledge they did not
Since you have provided no text, that you assume I have misinterpreted, I can only wait to see which ones
start in jar's prophecy thread.
fortunately we are not debating that thread, nor do I have desire, as I have already indicated, to follow Jars method of reasoning, which is repetetion without response
were you even aware that there are books in the bible that fail to mention god? how do you propose to make those messianic, let alone about christ?
Yes I am aware of this, the same way I am aware that Job, makes no reference to the Law, or even implies its existence
I never said every word in the OT was a messianic prophecy.
One of the main ways i know an OT prophecy was about Christ is having an inspired writer in the NT tell me its interpretation
I agree that some may not appear as messianic, but when told by an inspiried writer that they refer to Christ, it surpasses your disagreement that it is not
Think about it, why would I accept your conclusions over thiers? Can you give me agood reason?
The OT says that out of Israel will come a great king, that will rule in Israel and that his kingdom will know no end.
This kingdom was of course the Church, that spoken of by Christ when he said, "My kingdom is not of this world, if it were my servants would fight"
"I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it, and i will give to Peter the keys to the kingdom"
give me ag ood reason why I should accept your or Jars conclusions over one claiming inspiration, in a book filled with evidence
"We have not followed cunningly devised fables, but were eyewitnesses to his majesty"
Do you have better information? Its just your word against thiers and that is what it boils down to. Guess who I am going to accept
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by arachnophilia, posted 12-14-2010 11:58 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2010 4:08 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 176 by jar, posted 12-15-2010 11:37 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 204 by arachnophilia, posted 12-15-2010 6:19 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 210 by dwise1, posted 12-15-2010 7:20 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 212 by Theodoric, posted 12-15-2010 7:24 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 169 of 566 (596484)
12-15-2010 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by arachnophilia
12-14-2010 11:54 PM


Re: scriptural unity
as Dr. A. points out, not knowing positively, and knowing negatively are two different things. we might not know who killed jimmy hoffa, but we can place some reasoned guesses. and none those guesses would ever include the famous emperor of france who lived a hundred years before.
I agree and there is no justification for you assuming that the writers of the NT, did not know Christ. that assertion alone is ludicrous
Not only do they claim to have been with him, there is no time frame problem even if they were written as late as you claim
That dating is a bit liberal, even so, it does not lead to the absolute conclusion that they would not known or have been with him
I think it is great we are talking about this right at Christmas time
Where in the world did you get the silly notion that those writers did not know of Christ in a personal manner?
the gospels were all written after the death of christ. well after. 40 or 50 years. those attributions are all tradition. the original books did not come with attributions.
Even if this were true, it does not lead to the conclusionof your assertion that they did not know him personally
and i believe you're looking at "inspiration" the wrong way around. you're assuming it, and hammer the facts out to fit it. rather, you should assume the facts, and then see if you can reach your inspirational conclusion. you might find that it becomes incredibly difficult when you're not bending facts to fit your model.
Ill let you demonstrate your conclusion here
i suggest you look at the actual scholarship on the matter, and not misguided apologetics.
Amazing, he calls F. F. Bruce, misguided apologetics
This is truely amazing, you really dont understand what you are doing do you? You reject without hesitation any conclusion I have drawn and say it is not possible and cannot be accepted.
Then without even realizing it ( I believe) you assume that all of your assertions and conclusions must be accepted without hesitation, because that is what the evidence must demonstrate, yet it does not
Truely amazing
You write
that is not a given fact, but rather is precisely the question under debate. your problem is that you assume your conclusions.
But of course you are free from such a fate , correct? Best evidence Arch, thats all we have
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by arachnophilia, posted 12-14-2010 11:54 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by arachnophilia, posted 12-15-2010 6:26 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 170 of 566 (596491)
12-15-2010 3:43 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by arachnophilia
12-15-2010 12:57 AM


Taq writes:
Yes, I did. Knowing what scripture says is independent of believing what scripture says. They are two different things.
Arch writes:
actually, i find that claimed belief in what the scripture says frequently gets in the way of knowing what scripture says. believers are so ready to betray the very thing they claim to cherish, just to get it to line up with their predetermined belief.
And of course what taq says and what you quoted from him, is simply double talk verbage, unless demonstrated on a single point in an argument form
Do you have anything better than, "a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush"?
people who set out to know what the scriptures say are frequently very surprised that it does not accurately detail the beliefs they once had about those same scriptures.
You fellas are killing me with these gems of wisdom
But isnt that the point, we base our understanding against what the scriptures actually says
But here is another amazing point. You clearly, as I have read other posts of yours, dont believe it is from God or inspired of God, yet your are sure that your conclusions must be the correct ones
You imply that others that do not accept your conlcusions must of course be in error, because they do not see things as you do against the "evidence" you have collected
But using the messianic prophecies as an example, you cannot provide absolute evidence that they are not predictive of Jesus Christ. when in fact the "evidence" we do have certainly leans in that favor
So, is there any possibility that we could be correct concerning our conclusions atleast in that respect? Yes or No?
Just curious?
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by arachnophilia, posted 12-15-2010 12:57 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Taq, posted 12-15-2010 12:09 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 206 by arachnophilia, posted 12-15-2010 6:41 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 370 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 171 of 566 (596494)
12-15-2010 4:08 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 3:01 AM


Re: scriptural unity
The OT says that out of Israel will come a great king, that will rule in Israel and that his kingdom will know no end.
This kingdom was of course the Church, that spoken of by Christ when he said, "My kingdom is not of this world, if it were my servants would fight"
Of course. Of course "king" means "not a king", and "will rule in Israel" means "will not rule in Israel".
I think I'm getting the hang of hermeneutics. So when Genesis says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", it means "In the beginning God did not create the heavens and the earth", right?
After all, if we started taking the Bible literally we'd believe all sorts of silly things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 3:01 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 4:18 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 172 of 566 (596495)
12-15-2010 4:09 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by dwise1
12-15-2010 1:52 AM


Re: Please learn how to read, Dawn
For your information Dawnette, I was the one trying in vain to break through your idiocy and inform you of that same thing, that the topic is not about trying to make Dawnette deconvert. Yet you kept demanding to be told what would make you personally deconvert.
You remind me of Heritic, you simply can't get anything correct.
You a funny guy. Dewise, simply because I am asking for a valid reason to convert, is not equivolent to me personally asking for it for my purposes
From the start it was meant to be set out as an argument or question and for someone to provide that reason.
Your making to much out of a cavil. You do know what a cavil is, right?
You are nothing but an unprincipled liar. Why don't you try to be man enough to own up to your actions? But, no, you are not man enough. You will just continue to try to hide your lies under even more lies, even though everybody can see what you are doing.
Im sure you are a nice guy in person and your family and the Navy are proud of your accomplishments in both Navy and writing.
But kindly and respectfully, I must say you have a long road in the area of reasoning properly
BTW, doyou have an argument that you could put forward that would be a valid reason for ANYONE to deconvert. Atleast from you perspective
Calm down Dewise1 we are just here to learn and have fun
Yes, you have taught me that my grammar sucks. Ill try and do better
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by dwise1, posted 12-15-2010 1:52 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by dwise1, posted 12-15-2010 2:48 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 200 by dwise1, posted 12-15-2010 2:54 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 173 of 566 (596496)
12-15-2010 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by Dr Adequate
12-15-2010 4:08 AM


Re: scriptural unity
Of course. Of course "king" means "not a king", and "will rule in Israel" means "will not rule in Israel".
My guess is that you know exacally what Christ was saying concerning his kingship and kingdom, just like the rest of us, but you enjoy playing the dumb card.
But it wont be until your death bed or the fear of old age setting in that you will make the typical recant
Cowards usually operate in that manner. To bad I wont be there to see it, but my guess is that it will happen
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2010 4:08 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by Panda, posted 12-15-2010 5:50 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 175 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2010 6:48 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3798 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 174 of 566 (596498)
12-15-2010 5:50 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 4:18 AM


Re: scriptural unity
As Dr. A. pointed out - and which you ignored by trying to change the subject:
Dawn Bertot, post #115 writes:
So do you have a reason why I should deconvert?
Dawn Bertot, post #138 writes:
Its not about me Moron
You obviously cannot read well.
Most of the time you don't even know what you have written.
Why should we think that you can read the bible when you can't read posts on a forum.
Many people have mentioned this before.
Your reading and writing is at a young child's level.
What is wrong with you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 4:18 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 12:27 PM Panda has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 370 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 175 of 566 (596499)
12-15-2010 6:48 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 4:18 AM


Re: scriptural unity
My guess is that you know exacally what Christ was saying concerning his kingship and kingdom, just like the rest of us, but you enjoy playing the dumb card.
But it wont be until your death bed or the fear of old age setting in that you will make the typical recant
Cowards usually operate in that manner. To bad I wont be there to see it, but my guess is that it will happen
My, my, what a nasty piece of work you are to be sure.
However, neither your real character nor your fantasies about my imaginary character seem germane to the topic or my post.
According to you, the OT predicts "a great king that will rule in Israel".
Clearly Jesus did not fulfill this prediction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 4:18 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 12:21 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34061
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 176 of 566 (596508)
12-15-2010 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 3:01 AM


The purpose of repetition.
Dawn Bertot writes:
fortunately we are not debating that thread, nor do I have desire, as I have already indicated, to follow Jars method of reasoning, which is repetetion without response
The purpose of repetition is to point out to all that you have not responded to the issues raised or questions asked.
And the purpose of pointing you towards the other thread was to allow you the opportunity to present support for your many assertions that there are Old Testament prophecies that refer to or are related to Jesus and that Jesus somehow fulfilled some of those prophecies.
It is interesting that you do not respond to any of those requests except by continuing to claim such support without actually specifying anything that can then be questioned, verified or tested.
Edited by jar, : fix subtitle

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 3:01 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 12:32 PM jar has replied
 Message 183 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 12:36 PM jar has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 177 of 566 (596514)
12-15-2010 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Dawn Bertot
12-14-2010 4:58 PM


Re: scriptural unity
You once again, provide no argument or vaild reason why I or anyone should deconvert
I no longer believed that God existed. Why is this not a valid reason for my deconversion?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-14-2010 4:58 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 178 of 566 (596515)
12-15-2010 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 3:43 AM


And of course what taq says and what you quoted from him, is simply double talk verbage, unless demonstrated on a single point in an argument form
I can read the Iliad and understand the goals and actions that Zeus and others had during that time period. In understanding those goals, does this force me to believe in the existence of Zeus and the other gods?
I can read many articles on Santa Claus and learn that Santa Claus wants to reward good kids with toys and bad kids with coal. Since I now know the doctrine of Santa Claus does this mean that I must also believe in the existence of Santa Claus?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 3:43 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 179 of 566 (596520)
12-15-2010 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Dr Adequate
12-15-2010 6:48 AM


Re: scriptural unity
According to you, the OT predicts "a great king that will rule in Israel".
Clearly Jesus did not fulfill this prediction.
Everyone make a mental note, DA disagrees that Jesus Christ is a Spiritual king over the Church (Spiritual Israel) and that is what the prophets predicted and the inspired writers in the NT make clear through inspiration and evidence
So Now, all DA has to do is demonstrate why I should believe HIM, with no evidence to the contrary and why I should ignore that Christ fits and fulfills those promises, the way they were originally intended, in a spiritual fashion
My guess is that you cannot provide a reason or evidence, anymore than you could not show a theme or purpose in the Koran
Lets see what youve got
Clearly Jesus did not fulfill this prediction.
Of course he did, its the church and he and his apostles make that known in both thier verbage and the evidence
Do you have any evidence that the church is not the kingdom the prophets spoke of?
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2010 6:48 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by jar, posted 12-15-2010 12:29 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 190 by ringo, posted 12-15-2010 1:22 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 207 by arachnophilia, posted 12-15-2010 6:47 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 213 by Theodoric, posted 12-15-2010 7:27 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 216 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2010 7:57 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 228 by Theodoric, posted 12-16-2010 11:22 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 255 by Theodoric, posted 12-17-2010 10:08 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 180 of 566 (596521)
12-15-2010 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Panda
12-15-2010 5:50 AM


Re: scriptural unity
Many people have mentioned this before.
Your reading and writing is at a young child's level.
What is wrong with you?
I noticed you have 300 and something posts to my 2200, do you think your tactics will work? Your a sad excuse at attempts to intimidate. If cavediver couldnt do it, you have no chance. He tried for several years
Ill tell you and keep telling you, your wasting your time son
perhaps you could actually present an argument to the topic of the thread. As of yet, I dont remember any attempt by yourself
Such is life
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Panda, posted 12-15-2010 5:50 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by nwr, posted 12-15-2010 1:40 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 195 by Panda, posted 12-15-2010 1:55 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 201 by dwise1, posted 12-15-2010 3:02 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 208 by arachnophilia, posted 12-15-2010 6:55 PM Dawn Bertot 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