Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion

Could any evidence or argument that presently exists, convert you to the idea that Christ is the Messiah?No, the thread should not end, because we both have strong opinions You keep telling me this but provide no Passage from any prophet that should make me believe that Christ did not meet the
requirementsIm sorry but to believe that inspiration in a book repleat with miracles, is not relevant, makes no logical sense While I said INTENDED, I should have said it was not in Gods original plan for them to have an earthly king.His intention in giving them a king was to demonstrate that they actually needed no earthly king and should not have insisted upon on one . They had a king, it was GodThose are Gods on words, not mine. Those words were spoken before any earthly king was in placeIts always a human charactetistic to try and suplant Gods wishes.Here is another example. Christ is the head f the Church. He reigns from heaven as head of the Church.Not satisfied with this setup, the Catholics have given thier Church an earthly head, the Pope.There is no room for such, in reason or revelationSuch is human natureDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

I said nothing about your claim being outrageous, I said it made no logical or rational sense sense, without inspiration And you and Jar continue to ignore in argumentation form that to use or imply that the prophets words in one area should be considered as rational, because you are using them to prove a point, then ignore the rest of what they have to say because it is not reliable, makes no logical or biblical senseHere is an example.Should I trust Isa's words when in Chapter six verse one he says, "I saw the Lord sitting on his throne in heaven and his train filled the temple"Are these words true and reliableDawn Bertot

But more importantly, they are arguments of a logical and rational nature The assertion of "unreasoned" is not an argument, its an assertion I was right, you were the ninth grader Dont worry, you will learn as you go along, not to make assertions you cannot support. Thanks for admitting you do not have oneEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

HardlyTrying to rely on a source, that one one believes to be unreliable and inacurate, (as jar clearly does)to begin with, is complete nonsense.Thats the point DA, how can Jar decide thet they are "accurate" before inspired, when he believes thier claims of inspiration and miracles to be myth and made up stuff.I have asked him and Arch to provide me a statement from the prophets, non-miraculous in nature, that I could consider as reliable, if they can't believe or dont trust anything else they said of a miraculous nature.How in the world would you distinguish between the two? Which is reliable which is not? But he did if we are willing to agree and believe ALL the prophets have to say, concerning thier claims of miracles and inspirationhere is an example.Lets say Bush was still president and i told you i went to visit him in Washington at the white house in the oval office. Now there are four facts you can check. Washington, Bush, whitehouse and oval officeBut as I was telling you the story, I said as i was talking to them, him and his wife, and thier chairs began to rise up, a glow appeared around them and an angel placed crown on Bush's head.Now, you would even begin to question, whether I was actually there, much less having seen such an event, correct?Inspiration does NOT matter? You've got to be kidding meDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

No-one is relying on such a source, as you would understand if understanding things was amongst your talents. He has not decided that they are accurate, as you would know if knowing things was your forte. You do not say of what you intended the following drivel to be an example. If it was meant to be an example of a non sequitur, then you have achieved your aim and should rest on your laurels. Otherwise, not so much.

Hi, Dawn Bertot. So, you don't believe that the Holy Ghost plays a role in converting people to Christianity? I'm rather confident that nearly all Christians aside from you do. If you just don't like how I've worded it, then please suggest an alternative wording.If no such "witness" (or whatever you want to call it) exists, then there is no valid reason to have converted in the first place, which is very strong support indeed for the decision to deconvert.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

quote:

---

[Says me] My argument as to "Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for de-conversion" is "Any reason one wants to use to dump unreasoned beliefs is valid and supportable if the apostate thinks it's valid and supportable, and no one else has claim to argue his decision otherwise."

---

"unreasoned" is neither an argument nor an assertion, it's a condition. The argument is "It's no ones business but his own; therefore, any reason he cares to posit is valid.". It appears to be your nature to stick 'buts' in where they belong. The assertion of ", they are arguments of a logical and rational nature[sic]" is not an argument, it's an assertion. But, I'll be generous and pretend you said something meaningful. Your arguments in toto have been: The writers of the Bible were inspired and therefore could not be wrong; nor, judged to be wrong by the likes of the uninspired. Not logical; not rational, but clearly authoritarian. You broke my dibbs. Pay up. I'm fairly sure everyone here was a ninth grader. I'll even grant that you made it that far. It is nearly Christmas after all.

quote:

---

[Says me] As to giving you a reason for you to dump your sniveling, little god; why on Earth would I care to do that? I think it's funny. I like funny.

---

Which one of my assertions don't you agree with? That I don't care to offer you a reason; that I think it's funny; or, that I like funny? With the bar set so low, I'm pretty sure I can support all of those. Technically, I didn't admit to not having one, I merely implied it. But, as it is nearly Christmas: I don't have a reason that you should forsake you sniveling, little god. No one does well, maybe your mother. But so long as it doesn't infringe upon my right of recognizing your puny god's snivelity you're entitled to your belief. This topic is not about you.

---

When cometh the day
We lowly ones
Through quiet reflection
And great dedication
Master the art of karate
Lo, we shall rise up
And then we'll make
The bugger's eyes water
Roger Waters

Dawn asks: At best? Not at all. There's a lot good stuff to read in there. A lot of points about human civilization and how they began to formulate codifications as approximations of civilized laws in its primitive days. Perhaps the best function of the Bible (whatever that is) is to demonstrate how frail the human mind is and how easily large percentages of them can be fooled at once. We should do everything we can to preserve it as a record of our mistaken history. Keep up the good work. Anthropology needs all the help it can get.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

Dawn completely loons out again with: Who cares about what YOU think...IF SOMEONE. Can't you read? The question begins with "IF SOMEONE" - is that YOU? Not necessarily. Anybody could be that someone. In fact we already know that you are not that someone. The OP asks NOT if there is anything to deconvert YOU. It asks "Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion?"Aside from the fact that you have NOT clearly shown a unity, that isn't the point here: If someone NOT YOU reads some bible that they had been told to believe was telling the Truth and instead, upon their own complete analysis, decides that there is no unity of doctrine or theme, are they not fully justified in deconverting?If Osama bin Laden takes another look at the book he believes in and decides that it is nothing more than a good collection of parables and morality stories, so he deconverts, surely you would agree that this a valid, supportable reason for deconversion?If anyone else BUT YOU takes another look at the book he or she believes in and decides that it is nothing more than a good collection of parables and morality stories, so he deconverts, surely you would agree that this a valid, supportable reason for deconversion?Here - imagine if you had started this topic: Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for my own deconversion?You would get about 6 or so simple replies: No.I'm sad that you are lost.
Anyway, Merry Christmas!Edited by xongsmith, : replaced wrong word

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

Son, I know you are trying to assist Jar in making sense out of what he is attempting, but there is no way, to extricate him from the worst from of contradiction he has involved himself inHe is attempting to demonstrate that the Christ mentioned in the NT, is not who and what the prophets were speaking aboutBy direct implication or outright assertion he is assuming the prophets were correct or accurate in their statements, of and about the the things the propheciedNow if he is saying as you have indicated that they are not accurate, it would follow logically, he has no way of knowing whether Christ was not the fulfillmentIf he is saying they are accurate, then he contradicts himself at other points where he says God does not exist and is not the author of the scriptures, or more specifically the prophetsPlease explain why my estimation in this matter is incorrect or invalid?I cant wait to here it Well perhaps he could tell us what it is that he HAS decided, in some logical fashionDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

So, you don't believe that the Holy Ghost plays a role in converting people to Christianity? I'm rather confident that nearly all Christians aside from you do. If you just don't like how I've worded it, then please suggest an alternative wording.Of course I do. However, what you were speaking about and what I responded to in that previous post was someones personal experience, they should FEEL literally, at or during conversion.Nowhere does the NT imply or state that you will feel something other than the knowledge and assurance, given his word, that you are now free from the bondage of sin.The herkie Jerkies and the other claimed feelings are not mentioned as a part of the conversion experienceIf it is then please provide the passage Wrong. Thats like saying I shouldnt believe in God because I dont feel it (something other than normal sensation) against the clear evidence of his exsistenceIOW, the evidence of God and the evidence that the scriptures is the Word of God, that which supports it, gives me assurance that my life now has purpose above and beyond the graveThe is no need for the Spirit to knock me down or give some sort of funny feeling. The evidence does that for meDawn Bertot

And guess what. So far in EVERY case examined I have shown that to actually be the case. There is even a thread devoted just to that.If YOU think there is an Old Testament prophecy that refers to Jesus, please post the chapter and verse in that thread so your claim can be questioned and challenged. Are any of these prophecies fulfilled by Jesus?Edited by jar, : add a link for Dawn to the appropriate thread

---

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

Wrong. But let me know when you have an actual argument, that is not a repetition of my original question, you would like to present. Id be happy to examine itDawn Bertot

Nearly a sentence. This is close to being a sentence too.
A good try. D-So, still no explanation of why we should believe you are an expert or a scholar when your reading and writing is so sub-normal?Is cognitive dissonance forcing you to deny your lack of ability?
I expect that if you could acknowledge your failure at English you would have to question everything you think the bible says.I guess it would make your whole life a failure if you learnt to read properly and then found out that your whole belief system was based on your faulty comprehension of the bible.
Maybe at your age you would rather die being wrong while thinking you are right.

My simple friend, you cant even get out of the starting gate to attempt such a feat, because you wont even tell us whether the OT prophets were accurate in their statements or estimationsHere it is again. Provide me with a statement/s from the prophets, of a miraculous or non-miraculous nature that you believe to be RELIABLE and ACCURATE, then tell me why you believe both or one is accurateThen you can get started on questioning Jesus' and the NT claims. Until then you cant even be taken serious from any rational or logical standpointheck, at this point I would like it if you would care tell me anything you believe about the OT, muchless the prophetsHave fun.Dawn Bertot