Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,641 Year: 4,898/9,624 Month: 246/427 Week: 56/103 Day: 0/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion
lyx2no
Member (Idle past 4801 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


(1)
Message 271 of 566 (597007)
12-18-2010 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 10:53 PM


With God's Assistance.
a certain amount of faith is required to believe that a donkey spoke w/ Gods [sic] assistance [sic]
Yet reading only one of your posts proves beyond unmitigated doubt that a donkey can type rubbish.
P.S.: You owe me royalties on your arguments from authority.

Nonconformists come one at a time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 10:53 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-19-2010 6:59 PM lyx2no has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 272 of 566 (597008)
12-18-2010 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 10:53 PM


Re: scriptural unity
Dawn Bertot writes:
friend, no argument from it will derail anything I have been saying or have believed and studied.
I have encouraged you to bring your strongest or comprehensive argument here, yet you refuse
i refuse because it will utterly derail this topic, and there is a certain merit to having things in the right places. those wishing to learn about or debate prophecy are probably going to be looking in the prophecy thread. there is a reason we try to stick to the topic on this board -- everything quickly becomes chaos if we do not.
why exactly is it so hard for you to go post in that thread?
If a person doesnt even believe such things against the other areas of evidence that support the scriptures, how or why would one care whether a writer was inspired to make a prediction to begin with.
er, you are complicating the issue entirely too much. if the text is not truthful, it's not inspired. or god lies. take your pick.
In contrast, if the writer was inspired, the it would follow that only God could explain a dual or an illudstration type prophecy, correct/
no, it does not follow. because then the reader would have to inspired as well. at which point, the bible itself no longer serves any function. it would have no reason to exist.
While a prophecy may have applied to a certain old test character, why is God not allowed to make it have a fuller and expanded meaning, for his ultimate purposes
you are more than welcome to examine that position in the prophecy thread. however, i think you find that this "fuller and expanded meaning" is generally a tiny sliver of the actual prophecy, taken entirely out of context, and that the real prophecy as written in the OT has the fuller and more complete meaning.
So my friend it matters greatly whether you believe they were inspired
no, it really doesn't. it only matters whether or not the NT claims of fulfilled prophecy are supported.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 10:53 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 273 of 566 (597009)
12-18-2010 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by jar
12-18-2010 10:41 PM


Re: How to test writings.
If I find the Bible to be just a collection of writings on a variety of subjects addressed to people of different eras and cultures, why is that not sufficient?
If both the NT and OLD writers were inspired, then there is a theme, its Jesus Christ, all the way through
But only God could make this clear in the nature of more inspiration, correct?
If neither were not, who cares who Jesus was correct? At best he was a liar and the prophets were insane because they believed they had performed miracles
Oh yes, inspiration matters greatly
The difference between the Koran and the Bible, is that the Koran clearly even by a simple application and reading has no theme anywhere. It seems to be random sayings slung together w/ on obvious purpose
Since I can find an obvious and clear theme between the testaments, atleast attested to by the Nt writers. perhaps you could go to the Koran and find the some sort of theme
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by jar, posted 12-18-2010 10:41 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by arachnophilia, posted 12-18-2010 11:19 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 276 by jar, posted 12-18-2010 11:28 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 308 by xongsmith, posted 12-20-2010 5:34 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 274 of 566 (597010)
12-18-2010 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 11:17 PM


Re: How to test writings.
Dawn Bertot writes:
The difference between the Koran and the Bible, is that the Koran clearly even by a simple application and reading has no theme anywhere. It seems to be random sayings slung together w/ on obvious purpose
perhaps the problem is that you're simply not inspired. see, if you don't think it's inspired, then you obviously won't see the themes.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 11:17 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 11:30 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 275 of 566 (597012)
12-18-2010 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 11:00 PM


Re: How to test writings.
Dawn Bertot writes:
can you check to see and understand what Gods overall intentions and purposes were by giving inspiration to the writer?
yes. believe it or not, the bible is not that hard to understand. you just kind of have to read it. i don't know why you think it's so incomprehensible.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 11:00 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-19-2010 7:04 PM arachnophilia has replied

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


Message 276 of 566 (597013)
12-18-2010 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 11:17 PM


Re: How to test writings.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Since I can find an obvious and clear theme between the testaments, atleast attested to by the Nt writers. perhaps you could go to the Koran and find the some sort of theme
Yes, we all agree that YOU see some obvious and clear theme between the testaments, but that is irrelevant to the questions I asked, as is the Qur'an.
In case you missed them, here are the questions you were asked.
quote:
Why if I look and find that there is no unity of doctrine and theme in the Bible (which is pretty obvious to anyone that understands there is not even such a thing as "The Bible") is that not sufficient and supportable reason to throw away the god and religion you try to market?
If I find the Bible to be just a collection of writings on a variety of subjects addressed to people of different eras and cultures, why is that not sufficient?
Note that I asked if what I described would be a sufficient reason.
If someone looks at the Bible and finds no unity of doctrine (and note that you have never shown such a unity of doctrine) and theme (and note that you have never shown that there is a common theme or explained how that could possibly be true since there is no such thing as "The Bible"), would that be sufficient reason?
Remember, in case you have forgotten, that the topic is "Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion ".
Edited by jar, : left out the word see in "...YOU see some..."

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 11:17 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 11:38 PM jar has replied

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


Message 277 of 566 (597014)
12-18-2010 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by arachnophilia
12-18-2010 11:19 PM


Re: How to test writings.
perhaps the problem is that you're simply not inspired. see, if you don't think it's inspired, then you obviously won't see the themes.
Do you think its filled with allegations of miracles?
So should i look at it as if those claims are not true as well?
When you remove inspiration and the miraculous your left with nothing but rambling, insane, liars, corrrect?
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by arachnophilia, posted 12-18-2010 11:19 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by arachnophilia, posted 12-18-2010 11:34 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 278 of 566 (597015)
12-18-2010 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 11:30 PM


Re: How to test writings.
oh, clearly you can't tell that they aren't true, because you're not inspired.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 11:30 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 279 of 566 (597016)
12-18-2010 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by jar
12-18-2010 11:28 PM


Re: How to test writings.
omeone looks at the Bible and finds no unity of doctrine (and note that you have never shown such a unity of doctrine) and theme (and note that you have never shown that there is a common theme or explained how that could possibly be true since there is no such thing as "The Bible"), would that be sufficient reason?
No, for two reasons. One you have ignored the obvious and clear evidence that lends support to the scriptures verses other writings we have already discussed
Secondly, based on a lack of and ignoring that evdience you have rejected even the notion that it may be inspired by God
Which renders your approach to discredit Christ silly, seeing you dont even believe the writers you use to discredit him.
Strange logic
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by jar, posted 12-18-2010 11:28 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by jar, posted 12-18-2010 11:51 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 280 of 566 (597017)
12-18-2010 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 11:38 PM


How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
Dawn Bertot writes:
jar writes:
{If s}omeone looks at the Bible and finds no unity of doctrine (and note that you have never shown such a unity of doctrine) and theme (and note that you have never shown that there is a common theme or explained how that could possibly be true since there is no such thing as "The Bible"), would that be sufficient reason?
No, for two reasons. One you have ignored the obvious and clear evidence that lends support to the scriptures verses other writings we have already discussed
Secondly, based on a lack of and ignoring that evdience you have rejected even the notion that it may be inspired by God
Which renders your approach to discredit Christ silly, seeing you dont even believe the writers you use to discredit him.
Strange logic
Dawn Bertot
First, if you think you have actually presented any evidence, please provide a link to the post where you included that evidence.
Again, if you can show where I "rejected even the notion that it may be inspired by God", then provide a link to that post.
If you can show that I at any time have tried to discredit Christ, please provide a link to that message.
Remember Dawn, people here can actually check what has been posted just as we can check to see what is actually written in the Old and New Testament.
Finally, you still have not addressed the question. I'll try yet again in the hope that you will understand what is being asked.
If someone looks at the Bible and finds no unity of doctrine (and note that you have never shown such a unity of doctrine) and theme (and note that you have never shown that there is a common theme or explained how that could possibly be true since there is no such thing as "The Bible"), would that be sufficient reason?
There is nothing in there about YOUR opinions, it is a straight forward question related to their findings. If they look at the Bible and find no unity of doctrine (and note that you have never shown such a unity of doctrine) and theme (and note that you have never shown that there is a common theme or explained how that could possibly be true since there is no such thing as "The Bible"), would that be sufficient reason?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 11:38 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-19-2010 6:50 PM jar has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 369 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 281 of 566 (597051)
12-19-2010 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by Dawn Bertot
12-18-2010 10:23 PM


Re: scriptural unity
Sorry, when you can boast the history, unity and details that is the 'scriptures', maybe you can make such a claim.
Are you related to the fella that said there was a spaceship behind the moon to take us all away. You must be because your claim carries about as much weight
Do you have any fulfilled predictions before the one you made above? That would also help us believe you
You really should learn how to debate DA. Oh yeah thats right, youve never actually done it, have you?
This gibberish seems unrelated to my point. Perhaps this is because you find my point unanswerable, or perhaps this is merely another manifestation of your long, hopeless, pointless struggle with the English language.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-18-2010 10:23 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Panda, posted 12-19-2010 10:15 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

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


Message 282 of 566 (597055)
12-19-2010 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by Dr Adequate
12-19-2010 9:16 AM


Re: scriptural unity
Dawn writes:
You really should learn how to debate disingenuously DA. Oh yeah thats right, youve never actually done it, have you?
This makes a lot more sense with the extra word inserted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-19-2010 9:16 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

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


Message 283 of 566 (597112)
12-19-2010 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by arachnophilia
12-17-2010 12:38 PM


Re: scriptural unity
correct. you can, however, prove when they are not. as it turns out, it's actually much easier to prove a negative than it is to prove a positive.
nothing of course could ever dispel my view of the evidence of scripture or its inspiration, buts lets assume for a moment, it was not inspired.
Besides there being no need to demonstrate whether Jesus was the messiah, if there were no inspiration(IOWs who would care)what evidence exacally would you use to refute that idea?
jewish messianic prophecy, and christian claims of fulfillment do not match. one or both of them must be wrong.
Excluding theTalmud, which Jesus often corrected, lets stay strickly with the OT prophets. Why is your statement factual?
so, basically because it says so?
Here speaking of inspiration
No. Not only because it says so, but it is in line with what the Old testament taught concerning a Messiah and the fact that God never intended the jews to have an earthly king
Secondly, the Jewish writers of the 1st century were in a much better perspective to know what the prophets meanings were. Thier perspective would have been much better than ours
Thirdly, your position assumes that an earthly ruler was what God intended. This is why the do not appear to match to you
However, Gods words to Samuel about kings and kingdoms, more closley matches that of Christs and the Apostles
God should have been thier only king. Christ reinforced that sentiment in his ministry and words.
"My kingdom is not of the world"
"The kingdom is within you"
"All authority has been given to me in heaven and earth"
So your conclusion is invalid concerning the prophets, or more specifically Gods intentions
It might interest you to know that not even the prophets, often understood what the fulfillment of thier words were or the words they spoke, according to Peter. But then we cant trust Peter can we, because he was just as uninspired as the Old Teastament prophets, correct?
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by arachnophilia, posted 12-17-2010 12:38 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by arachnophilia, posted 12-19-2010 8:52 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 284 of 566 (597116)
12-19-2010 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by jar
12-18-2010 11:51 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
Again, if you can show where I "rejected even the notion that it may be inspired by God", then provide a link to that post.
Wow that some fine sidestepping son
Jar, do you believe (that from your perspective that the Old testament prophets were inspired of God?
Yes, No, I dont know, theres no way to tell, etc, etc, etc.
If someone looks at the Bible and finds no unity of doctrine (and note that you have never shown such a unity of doctrine) and theme (and note that you have never shown that there is a common theme or explained how that could possibly be true since there is no such thing as "The Bible"), would that be sufficient reason?
I have clearly shown a unity of doctrine in the main purpose of the scriptures to begin with, Christ
explained how that could possibly be true since there is no such thing as "The Bible"),
If God is its author and the prophets were speaking by his authority and inspiration, it is a BOOK and has the unity of theme I demonstrated between the OT prophets and the ones in the NEW
No, to answer your question directly, that would not be suffiecient reason to deconvert, because, they have not looked hard enough and would have ingnored both reason and revelation. anyone can walk away from anything, thinking this or that, or that they are justified, but they are not doing it for a good reason, if the dont see unity of theme and purpose. Its to easy to miss
Jar, is the Bible Old or New or both inspired by God, in your opinion? its really not a hard question to answer
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by jar, posted 12-18-2010 11:51 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by jar, posted 12-19-2010 7:32 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 309 by xongsmith, posted 12-20-2010 6:06 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 285 of 566 (597117)
12-19-2010 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by lyx2no
12-18-2010 11:11 PM


Re: With God's Assistance.
P.S.: You owe me royalties on your arguments from authority.
Begging your pardon. Is there a point to the above comment. If you have an argument, then just present it.
Even if you are actually a ninth grader, Ill take it nice and slow so you can follow along
Forgive me if it wasnt you that claimed to be a ninth grader, in times past, I thought it was you but I could be mistaken
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by lyx2no, posted 12-18-2010 11:11 PM lyx2no has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by lyx2no, posted 12-19-2010 9:03 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024