Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,206 Year: 5,463/9,624 Month: 488/323 Week: 128/204 Day: 2/26 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4302 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 541 of 566 (598951)
01-04-2011 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 535 by Dawn Bertot
01-03-2011 7:39 PM


Re: other scriptures
learning and knowing the evidence behind the scriptures
That is the point, there is none. Only man's interpretation of the stories.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 535 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-03-2011 7:39 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 542 by jar, posted 01-04-2011 12:01 PM bluescat48 has replied
 Message 547 by arachnophilia, posted 01-04-2011 4:34 PM bluescat48 has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 542 of 566 (598953)
01-04-2011 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 541 by bluescat48
01-04-2011 11:52 AM


Re: other scriptures
Well there is some evidence. For example looking at the Isaiah story we can find evidence of the things mentioned actually happening, but only at that time, not over 600 years later.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 541 by bluescat48, posted 01-04-2011 11:52 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 543 by bluescat48, posted 01-04-2011 3:04 PM jar has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4302 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 543 of 566 (598979)
01-04-2011 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 542 by jar
01-04-2011 12:01 PM


Re: other scriptures
Well there is some evidence. For example looking at the Isaiah story we can find evidence of the things mentioned actually happening, but only at that time, not over 600 years later.
I'll accept that.
Edited by bluescat48, : typ

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 542 by jar, posted 01-04-2011 12:01 PM jar has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1456 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 544 of 566 (598993)
01-04-2011 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 537 by Dawn Bertot
01-03-2011 8:06 PM


Re: misrepresentation
Dawn Bertot writes:
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
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.
i know you honestly belief that and in some instances it may be true
in all instances. why should holy texts be an exception?
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
no, it does not.
I am relatively sure you made these comments, but you have made no prophecies or claims to inspiration from God about your arguments.
you are misrepresenting my position. my position is not that we must read and believe the text, but simply that we must read it.
The Bible and Isa makes these claims and they are either true or false
the truth of any quoted claim is irrelevant. we are simply comparing sources.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 537 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-03-2011 8:06 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 550 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 4:52 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1456 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 545 of 566 (598995)
01-04-2011 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 539 by dwise1
01-03-2011 8:24 PM


Re: other scriptures
dwise1 writes:
Dawn, please open your eyes. We're talking about the children raised in fundamentalist/evangelical/conservative Christian churches. Attending Christian schools throughout their childhoods. Or home-schooled. Going to "Jesus Camps" every summer. Getting thoroughly indoctrinated every day of their lives. That is no mere "association" with Chrisitian. That's drowning in it! And the painful process of deconversion that they describe proves it!
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.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 539 by dwise1, posted 01-03-2011 8:24 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 549 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 4:41 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 195 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
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

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1456 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 547 of 566 (598999)
01-04-2011 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 541 by bluescat48
01-04-2011 11:52 AM


Re: other scriptures
bluescat48 writes:
That is the point, there is none. Only man's interpretation of the stories.
what jar said is true. there is indeed archaeological and historical evidence associated with some of the stories in the bible. for instance, we know from external sources that the assyrian invasions referenced in isaiah 7 actually happened, and that israel was, in fact, destroyed by the second one.
the archaeological and historical records do not necessarily back up the bible's prophecies as 100% true, of course. even the bible's own history records do not do that -- simply compare 2 kings 15+16 to isaiah 7 to see that. there is also an image upthread of a stele left by shalmanessar iii, depicting someone described in the bible -- put as part of an event that seems rather intentionally left out.
generally speaking, the evidence gets stronger towards the end of the old testament period.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 541 by bluescat48, posted 01-04-2011 11:52 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 564 by bluescat48, posted 01-04-2011 6:50 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1456 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 548 of 566 (599001)
01-04-2011 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 546 by Dawn Bertot
01-04-2011 4:30 PM


Re: misrepresentation
Dawn Bertot writes:
His posts are uncessesarily lengthy and they repeat material already covered
this is because your replies are frequently answered by the thing you're replying to. repeating the refutation is necessary when you repeat the refuted claim.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 546 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 4:30 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 195 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
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 195 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
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

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3825 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 551 of 566 (599006)
01-04-2011 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 546 by Dawn Bertot
01-04-2011 4:30 PM


Re: misrepresentation
Dawn writes:
Please present what you think i have not responded to, ill demonstrate otherwise
Are you unable to read what was posted to see what you avoided addressing?
Well, here's one of the points. You can read the rest yourself - if you are able.
arachnophilia writes:
please cite me the chapter and verse in matthew in which the author of that text claims that god told him specifically what to write.
I expect you to hand wave this away as your dishonesty knows no bounds.
Your disingenuous debating tactics must make your god very proud.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 546 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 4:30 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 555 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 5:15 PM Panda has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1456 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 552 of 566 (599007)
01-04-2011 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 550 by Dawn Bertot
01-04-2011 4:52 PM


Re: misrepresentation
you're going to have to try harder, dawn, considering that i quoted almost your entire post, as i have in nearly every reply to you. if you feel i have left something important out -- besides, you know, the stuff i've already addressed a thousand times -- feel free to point it out.
my claims of misrepresentation were not baseless. they included context and clarification. yours are pedantry.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 550 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 4:52 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 556 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 5:21 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 553 of 566 (599008)
01-04-2011 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 550 by Dawn Bertot
01-04-2011 4:52 PM


Re: misrepresentation
For someone that claims to be logical you sure do get everything ass backwards.
If you claim that the words in Isaiah are not Isaiah's words but God's words, then Matthew is simply misrepresenting God, quote mining, being intellectually dishonest.
If then you want to claim that what is written in Matthew is not Matthew's words but rather God's words, then you have simply demonstrated that God was intellectually dishonest and really not very bright.
In fact, this one post of yours is more than sufficient reason to deconvert from the religion you try to market. Why should anyone worship such a dunce of a god?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 550 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 4:52 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1456 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 554 of 566 (599009)
01-04-2011 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 549 by Dawn Bertot
01-04-2011 4:41 PM


Re: other scriptures
Dawn Bertot writes:
Your position also assumes it has accurately taken care of anything we believe or accept as valid,[sic] to make the abover[sic] determination,[sic] it[sic] has not.
has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
You have assumed incorrectly that Matthew has misrepresented Isa[sic]'s words. You make this assumption on the basis of the plain and simple reading of the text.
look up "assumption" again, please.
You then disregard the entire text which makes it clear these are not Isa[sic]'s words to begin with[sic]
read isaiah again, please.
You further disregard inspiration as irrelevant, which is clearly a part of the text[sic]
read matthew again, please.
it[sic] would follow then that matthew[sic] was not misrepresenting Isa[sic]'s words and because inspiration is involved only inspiration could make known what Gods[sic] exact meaning in the words were.
quote:
arachnophilia writes:
please cite me the chapter and verse in matthew in which the author of that text claims that god told him specifically what to write.
You have falsely limited God to a then and now interpretation[sic]
i've correctly limited the text to what it says, instead of what dawn imagines.
At bare minimum your claim that matt[sic] misrepresents Isa[sic] is false, because they are not his words to begin with and that MY[sic] SIMPLE[sic] FRIEND[sic] IS[sic] WHAT[sic] THE[sic] TEXT[sic] INDICATES[sic] AND[sic] SAYS[sic] DIRECTLY[sic]
quote:
arachnophilia writes:
please cite me the chapter and verse in matthew in which the author of that text claims that god told him specifically what to write.
Arch[sic], Isa[sic], is it from man or God?
quote:
arachnophilia writes:
irrelevant
here[sic] is but a small example of how your MISUNDERSTANDING[sic] OF[sic] SCRIPTURE[sic] demonstrates that there is no "confirmation bias" on my part.
look up "confirmation bias" again, please.
you[sic] simply cant go by the rules you set up[sic]
quote:
you are misrepresenting my position. my position is not that we must read and believe the text, but simply that we must read it.
P.S. Arch[sic] Isa[sic], from God or man?
quote:
arachnophilia writes:
irrelevant

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 549 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2011 4:41 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 195 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(2)
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

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024