Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,636 Year: 4,893/9,624 Month: 241/427 Week: 51/103 Day: 9/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 515 of 566 (598814)
01-02-2011 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 511 by bluescat48
01-02-2011 5:41 PM


Re: highly illogical
So how does one know if the writer is inspired or not? That is the problem. Without some some kind of evidence, then none of it is inspired or it all is since there is no way of knowing if what the storyteller is an actual occurrence or something he dreamed up.
Correct. If however we are simply looking at what is "written in the text" as Arch suggests then we will see that it contains inspiration and intervention, actually one will easily see that God is in charge of it all, if it is taken in its context
Im not saying inspiration can be proved, Im saying if we go by his simple rules then it is very possible God not only inspired Isa, as he intimates, but Matthew as well and that the passages can have a fuller meaning across time, since God is actually in charge of it
Gods statement to Abraham, "Through thy seed shall ALL the natiions of the earth be blessed"
I am also saying that there is no need to conclude matthew misrepresents Isa, because God has inspired thier words, ATLEAST ACCORDING TO THE TEXT and in simple reading of the text.
No need for deconversion, because like Arch, they miss the purpose and meaning of scripture, even though it is staring them right in the face.
They are his rules not mine. I was simply trying to adhere to his rules
Since the scriptures and specifically Isa are more than repleat with inspiration and claims from God, why not include them if all we are doing is looking at the text????????????
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 511 by bluescat48, posted 01-02-2011 5:41 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 524 by arachnophilia, posted 01-03-2011 1:15 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 516 of 566 (598815)
01-02-2011 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 513 by arachnophilia
01-02-2011 8:01 PM


Re: highly illogical
unreliable, lying, imaginative, or whatever else, the stuff that isaiah talked about happened 700 years before christ was born. but it doesn't matter how unreliable that source is -- it only matters how well the other source represents it.
Well that is the silliest thing Ive ever heard. How can you misrepresent an unreliable source? How would you know you were misrepresenting it in the first place, if you dont know what the authors meanings or intentions were to begin with
How would you be misrepresenting it if you dont know what the facts are to be in the first place?
By picking one of your several interpretations of who or what the child represents, would I be misrepresenting Isa if I accidently chose the wrong explanation for who or what the child represents. How would I know i was choosing the wrong explanation, if there are three to choose from and we dont know what the correct one is exacally?
it doesnt matter how reliable the source is??????????
Heres an idea, maybe inspiration that is mentioned in the text could help me since you clearly cant
i'll rephrase, and repeat this point again. isaiah did not write the book of isaiah. someone else did. the same way that jesus did not write matthew. students record the words of the teacher.
Not according to a simple reading of the text. Isa or WHOEVER says Isa saw a vision and God revealed it to them.
Arch is the book of Isa from God or man?
If some parts are from God and some are not, tell me which is and which is not
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by arachnophilia, posted 01-02-2011 8:01 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 518 by DrJones*, posted 01-02-2011 11:21 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 525 by arachnophilia, posted 01-03-2011 1:20 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 517 of 566 (598820)
01-02-2011 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 514 by Iblis
01-02-2011 8:16 PM


Re: dual fulfillment
But just one would be a good start. Somewhere in the Hebrew scriptures, a prophecy that gets fulfilled twice, without having to use additional texts in other languages. That's all it would take to be at least plausible. It ought to be easy, if the doctrine of dual fulfillment is even remotely true.
It is so interesting and cool that you asked this question, almost if you were prompted to do so
Now you are starting to SEE the forest for because of the trees.
Every prophecy Old or New has a dual prophecy, without regard to time or language.
It has its physical application, then it has its truest meaning in God himself, as, God the Lord, God the deliever, etc, etc, etc
this is why when we get to the New Testament in Jesus christ, the theme and the dual meaning has not changed, its still about God, this time in the form of Jesus Christ
But still just God
If the Son in Isa represented a present physical son, then so be it. but the overall intent of the prophecy had a dual meaning in its fulfillment in God as the punisher and deliverer, even at that time
This is why it has the same application in Jesus Christ and is how inspiration wanted it to be used.
It was and is still about God
Here are two physical examples.
remember when Joshua was getting ready to do battle and he saw a man standing on the hill with his sword outstreched
he says are you for us or agin us
The man says, the Captain of the army of the Lord goes before you
Joshua knew immediately who it was and fell prostrate
The Lords intent was to let him know that God was in charge, this is not about you Joshua or Israel
remember when God had Joshua reduce his troops to 300 men against thousands
it was to let him know God was in charge. This about meJoshua, not you
Prophecy, illustration and life in the Old testment were all the same
It was always about God in its truest meaning, prophecy or otherwise
across time, written page, language, it has never changed. God
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 514 by Iblis, posted 01-02-2011 8:16 PM Iblis has not replied

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


Message 519 of 566 (598824)
01-02-2011 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 518 by DrJones*
01-02-2011 11:21 PM


Re: highly illogical
If I said "The sky is green" and you then told someone else "DrJones said the sky was purple", you would be misrepresenting me, even though what I said was not true.
How do I know you said that in the first place. thats the nature of unreliable, correct?
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 518 by DrJones*, posted 01-02-2011 11:21 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 520 by Panda, posted 01-02-2011 11:29 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 521 by DrJones*, posted 01-02-2011 11:38 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 526 by arachnophilia, posted 01-03-2011 1:25 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 531 of 566 (598912)
01-03-2011 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 529 by dwise1
01-03-2011 10:22 AM


Re: other scriptures
Dawn, it cannot be any coincidence that it's your own type of Christian theology that is hemorrhaging members. Something has to be causing it, something peculiar to that theology that they are fleeing. The subtext of your posts is that the solution to deconversion is your own type of indoctrination, but that cannot be true because those ex-fundamentalist deconverts had themselves received that exact same indoctrination.
Deny reality all you want. Hide your head deeper and deeper in the sand. Invoke more and more magical "explanations". That won't change reality one whit.
As i told you before , association with Christianity is not the same as being rooted and grounded in its tenets
Most of those people dont have firm foundation to support what little they believe
Ones like Jaywill, Icant, Buzz and myself clearly have firm foundation
I might remind you again that it is you the skeptic and Atheist that is in the low percentage as far as beliefs go.
What happened Dewise after thounsands of years, you are still in the single digit representation
Oh well such is life
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 529 by dwise1, posted 01-03-2011 10:22 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 532 by bluescat48, posted 01-03-2011 5:53 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 533 by jar, posted 01-03-2011 5:59 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 534 by Panda, posted 01-03-2011 6:05 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 539 by dwise1, posted 01-03-2011 8:24 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 535 of 566 (598922)
01-03-2011 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 532 by bluescat48
01-03-2011 5:53 PM


Re: other scriptures
Ok, I'll bite. What is this "firm foundation?"
As a person who was indoctrinated into Christianity stating at age 5,
but later left because I could find no foundation even when the initial class stared off with "These are the absolute truths, you cannot question them."
learning and knowing the evidence behind the scriptures, knowing what the scriptures actually teach and the ability to defend those truths is of primary importance in establishing a firm foundation
As you have seen from myself and the otherts here there is much more to Christianity and its defense, than those that have abandoned the faith, so quickly
I dont know who it was that told you not to question anything but they were mistaken.
Anywho that it
Dawn

This message is a reply to:
 Message 532 by bluescat48, posted 01-03-2011 5:53 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 536 by arachnophilia, posted 01-03-2011 7:54 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 541 by bluescat48, posted 01-04-2011 11:52 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 537 of 566 (598924)
01-03-2011 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 524 by arachnophilia
01-03-2011 1:15 AM


Re: misrepresentation
my position is that we must pay attention to what is actually written, and not that we must actually believe it. they two do not go hand in hand,
this of course would work in any other situation, excluding claims of inspiration and the miraculous. When someone claims this then attaches it to thier claims and prophecies, it immediately calls into question most of anything else they have to say
as i keep trying to explain to you. i do not know why you cannot grasp this concept. the accuracy of the source is irrelevant to concerns about how someone represents it.
i know you honestly belief that and in some instances it may be true, not when it comes to claims of the miraculous and put my reputation on the line, if I were to make claims in that connection
On the other hand looking straight at the text. When the author claims inspiration from God, and the prophecy is said to have COME from God. it immediatley bolsters the fact that since God is involved in the prophecy it can and does have an expanded meaning
Without it the prophecy is really worthless. Because we kn0ow mewn and men alone cannot predict the future
that includes me, my points do not have to be correct for your misrepresentation of them to be incorrect. at this point, i am forced to believe that you are doing this on purpose; that you are intentionally intellectually dishonest.
I am relatively sure you made these comments, but you have made no prophecies or claims to inspiration from God about your arguments.
So there is different form of check and balance that is necessary
The Bible and Isa makes these claims and they are either true or false
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 524 by arachnophilia, posted 01-03-2011 1:15 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 538 by Panda, posted 01-03-2011 8:22 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 540 by jar, posted 01-04-2011 11:50 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 544 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 4:23 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 546 of 566 (598997)
01-04-2011 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 538 by Panda
01-03-2011 8:22 PM


Re: misrepresentation
Why did you only address half of the points raised by arachnophilia?
Is it because you debate dishonestly; ignoring any information that contradicts your statements?
Present any point or argument he has put up and I will demonstrate I have asnwered and responded to it
His posts are uncessesarily lengthy and they repeat material already covered
Please present what you think i have not responded to, ill demonstrate otherwise
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 538 by Panda, posted 01-03-2011 8:22 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 548 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 4:36 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 551 by Panda, posted 01-04-2011 4:59 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 549 of 566 (599002)
01-04-2011 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 545 by arachnophilia
01-04-2011 4:26 PM


Re: other scriptures
you're looking at a form of confirmation bias, here, wise one. those that fall out of the church must not have been firmly grounded, because they fell out. this is sort of like the logic job's friends use on him. he must not have been a very good believer for god to curse him.
Your position also assumes it has accurately taken care of anything we believe or accept as valid, to make the abover determination, it has not.
To demonstrate that point, ill use the present discussion at hand.
You have assumed incorrectly that Matthew has misrepresented Isa's words. You make this assumption on the basis of the plain and simple reading of the text.
You then disregard the entire text which makes it clear these are not Isa's words to begin with
You further disregard inspiration as irrelevant, which is clearly a part of the text
it would follow then that matthew was not misrepresenting Isa's words and because inspiration is involved only inspiration could make known what Gods exact meaning in the words were.
You have falsely limited God to a then and now interpretation
At bare minimum your claim that matt misrepresents Isa is false, because they are not his words to begin with and that MY SIMPLE FRIEND IS WHAT THE TEXT INDICATES AND SAYS DIRECTLY
Arch, Isa, is it from man or God?
here is but a small example of how your MISUNDERSTANDING OF SCRIPTURE demonstrates that there is no "confirmation bias" on my part.
you simply cant go by the rules you set up
Dawn Bertot
P.S. Arch Isa, from God or man?
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 545 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 4:26 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 554 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:11 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 550 of 566 (599005)
01-04-2011 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 544 by arachnophilia
01-04-2011 4:23 PM


Re: misrepresentation
again, this is irrelevant. the source we're quoting could be an absolute pack of lies. or pure unadulterated fiction. it really doesn't matter how reliable the source is -- misquoting it, or quoting it out of context, is still intellectually dishonest.
This my friend is exacally what you are doing by not including the entire context
By leaving out the part about whos words these are in the first place
Intellectual dishonesty indeed
especially when you are the one that set up the rules
Dawn Bertot
PS Step up to the information desk there and see exacally whos waiting room you are in

This message is a reply to:
 Message 544 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 4:23 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 552 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:00 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 553 by jar, posted 01-04-2011 5:02 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 555 of 566 (599010)
01-04-2011 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 551 by Panda
01-04-2011 4:59 PM


Re: misrepresentation
I expect you to hand wave this away as your dishonesty knows no bounds.
Your disingenuous debating tactics must make your god very proud.
ill do this for you even though you are nothing but a filthy immoral little person, intent on confusion rather than understanding
matthew
10:1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.
2Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
3Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
4Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
5These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
8Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
9Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses,
10Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat.
11And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
12And when ye come into an house, salute it.
13And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
14And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
15Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
16Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
17But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
18And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.
19But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
20For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.
Do you see any claims to inspiration here Panda
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 551 by Panda, posted 01-04-2011 4:59 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 557 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:21 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 563 by Panda, posted 01-04-2011 5:37 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 556 of 566 (599014)
01-04-2011 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 552 by arachnophilia
01-04-2011 5:00 PM


Re: misrepresentation
my claims of misrepresentation were not baseless. they included context and clarification. yours are pedantry.
Wrong alluding to inspiration and then ignoring it as part of the context, as you dont do with all the other "facts" in the text is not context and clairification
its evasion and not going by your own rules
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 552 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:00 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 559 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:25 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 558 of 566 (599016)
01-04-2011 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 557 by arachnophilia
01-04-2011 5:21 PM


Re: misrepresentation
now, show that matthew the disciple wrote the book traditionally titled matthew.
I like what Kyle Butt said in the Barker/Butt debate about you fellas, Its always, just show me one more piece of evidence, then Ill believe.
Like that sign that says "free beer tommorrow"
God wrote it as matthew indicates, not matthew
dawn bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 557 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:21 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 561 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:31 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

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


Message 560 of 566 (599019)
01-04-2011 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 559 by arachnophilia
01-04-2011 5:25 PM


Re: misrepresentation
my position is that we must pay attention to what is actually written, and not that we must actually believe it.
I never said your words werent there, I said you dont go by your own rules
Are the words there that God actually inspired Isa's words? well of course they are
now should and can see what is actually written about that? Of course I can
Dawn bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 559 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:25 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 562 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:34 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 566 of 566 (599663)
01-09-2011 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 562 by arachnophilia
01-04-2011 5:34 PM


Re: misrepresentation
you didn't read my post. you didn't read the verse you cited. neither says what you think it says.
Wrong, Ive read the verse a thousand times and it is a claim to inspiration if even indirectly. Does Matthew say at some point God promised them inspiration, Why yes he does. Does John in 16:13, says the Spirit of promise would be sent, why yes he does?
The truth of the matter is that no matter what is presented in this context you would not believe it (or accept it even as a plain reading} anyway. Isa claims inspiration all through the book and even in the context of the prophecy and you still wont tell me if you will accept it as plain reading of the text
again, you have not shown that you have understood my rules, an are thus consistently misrepresenting them.
At its core, all your "rule" consists of is a simple and plain examination of the text. Even in the context of the prophecy Isa claims it to be from God? Your rule is simply an examination of what is says. Now all I need to do is examine what Isa says, even if I dont believe it. yet a simple examination as you suggest allows this premise
there is absolutely no misrepresentation on my part
okay dawn. let's assume that isaiah is 100% inspired by god, literally, and god himself wrote every word of it in his own hand.
why should i think the same of matthew? you have never given me a good reason to make the jump from one to the other, even if you do actually agree that one is inspired. "it says so" isn't a good reason. and it doesn't say so.
"It says so" is the exact type of rule you are employing in your own examination, of the text. Your determination of what Isa's conclusions are, are based upon the context and a plain and simple of, because Isa said so
Thats your approach without even considering Matthew
The first valid reason I have provided to make the jump as you call it, is because the prophecy, if from God, is primarily about God, not Isa, not israel, not Cyrus, nothing but God and Judge and Jury
Prophecies are much like parables, an earthly story with a heavenly meaning
Prophets represent God Arch, not themselves
The people understood it to be coming from God , not the prophet
The second is that the theme never changes from one testament to another, from one week or century to another. Its about God and Gods plans across time as revealed the scriptures
Thirdly, there are no other extensive claims that lay claim as jesus does to these OT prophecies
there is no reason to believe God did not inspire them the same way he did Isa
Fourthly, Christ meets all of the claims to prophecy
Fifthly and more importantly, in this context, you have provided no valid reason to indicate Matthew has misrepresented Isa to begin with, that is if it is inspired by God
Only inspiration could let you know who or what God had in mind through Isa
inspiration is the deal breaker for your and Jars simplistic approach to scripture and the prophecies
remove inspiration and Thus saith the Lord and your approach might make sense. Include it as it is clearly included and your approach falls to the ground
Remember even in the context of the prophecy the prophet claims inspiration about such things that were to follow. Why only examine what the prophecy has to say and NOT, WHO CLAIMS TO HAVE SAID IT, if it is in the very same passage?
No inspiration by a simple examination of the text, then none of it matters to a hill of beans, muchless whether JesuS was a Messiah or Matthew misrepresents him
If it is actually inspired, it makes all the difference in the world and to claims by Jesus and his Apostles as to whether they were accurate
The problem is that your and jars approach is neither realistic or rational (logical). Your approach cant be harmonized with reason or revelation. it makes no logical sense from any angle
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 562 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 5:34 PM arachnophilia 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