Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Testing The Christian Apologists
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 114 of 1086 (865958)
11-03-2019 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Phat
11-02-2019 4:20 PM


Re: Oh and about the Snake
Phat writes:
1) Assuming we are discussing a book of origins and a growing understanding of who God is, the consensus seems to be that God cannot lie.
That's a bizarre assumption. We're talking about an example in which God clearly did lie (or was mistaken or changed His mind, etc.)
Why do you believe the part where it says that He cannot lie and reject the part where it says that He did? How does that square with taking the Bible as a whole?
Phat writes:
If as you claim God did in fact lie, what do you expect people to do? Worship the snake?
Why do you go immediately to worship? I expect people first to acknowledge what the story actually says. I also expect them to question whether the connection between the snake and "Satan" has any value.
Phat writes:
Throw all apologetics, gods, and Gods out the window and go watch the ducks?
Yes, I hope people would do that.
Phat writes:
I am not challenging what the book says.
Yes you are.
You are constantly scoffing at the idea that the snake told the truth. He plainly did. And you are rejecting the idea that God lied because you have cherry-picked somewhere else where it says He cannot lie.
Phat writes:
I am challenging what you get out of it and why you defend it simply because "the book says it".
Well, the book does say it. Why would I complicate that?
Phat writes:
You know all too well what a lot of apologetics teaches.
Of course I do. How else would I know that they're making it all up?
I'm not asking you to explain what the Bible really, really, really means (as opposed to what it says). I'm asking you to think about what the apologists have been telling you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Phat, posted 11-02-2019 4:20 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 115 of 1086 (865959)
11-03-2019 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Phat
11-02-2019 4:29 PM


Re: Becoming My Own Apologist
Phat writes:
Upon further reflection, I am not defending what the book says. That is your job.
No it isn't. All I have to do is quote what it says. If you think it "means" something else, the responsibility is entirely on you to make your case.
Phat writes:
I am defending the idea that the ones with the Spirit are the fiery preachers, anointed teachers, and wise prophets of the modern age.
Again, you're not defending; you're asserting.
Phat writes:
... I will defend absolute truth.
Again, you don't defend it; you just assert it.
Phat writes:
For that reason, I reject the snake story described the way you describe it.
But I don't "describe" it. I quote it.
Phat writes:
You are and have always been a contrarian. ( adjective contrarian
opposing or rejecting popular opinion; going against current practice. )
The opinion and practice among scholars is that the Bible is not to be taken as a "whole". It's your fundamentalist view that is contrarian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Phat, posted 11-02-2019 4:29 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 117 of 1086 (866018)
11-04-2019 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Phat
11-04-2019 11:32 AM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
While not ready to dismiss the Christian Apologetic as "making stuff up" as you guys seem to do, I felt I needed to search deeper. Ringo, of course, claims that were I honest with myself, I would agree with EvC's line of reasoning.
I claim that if you were honest with yourself you would agree that the apologists are making stuff up. If it isn't what the Bible says, it's made up. It really is that simple.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 11:32 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 11:49 AM ringo has replied
 Message 119 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 11:56 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 120 of 1086 (866021)
11-04-2019 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Phat
11-04-2019 11:49 AM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
You can somewhat smugly stand on your assertion that the book says what it says, but you cannot argue that what it says it plainly and simply what it means.
Naturally, if you try to reconcile the Bible with your made-up theology you're going to end up with a tangled mess. That doesn't mean that the Bible itself is a tangled mess. What it is is a collection of discrete writings. Any attempt to reconcile them is bound to require adding complications on complications on complications.
The complications are in the false linkings, not in the Bible itself.
Phat writes:
The reason being is that you don't even believe that the characters exist outside of the book.
The first thing you need to understand is that my beliefs have absolutely nothing to do with it. You're just using my lack of belief as an excuse for dismissing what I say without thinking about it.
Phat writes:
If you understood Karl Barth, you would understand the road that led to my argument.
So explain Karl Barth.
Phat writes:
I'm not even sure what the argument is between you and I.
Read the topic title. I've been asking you for an example of an honest apologist - e.g. one who doesn't try to explain Genesis 2-3 away. So far, all you've produced is a long list of names and no arguments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 11:49 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:01 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 122 of 1086 (866023)
11-04-2019 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Phat
11-04-2019 11:56 AM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
Throw Your Evidence Away. It does not help the argument.
The evidence is the argument. Evidence always trumps belief.
Phat writes:
And mind you, the book is not the one on trial.
Your belief is on trial.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 11:56 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:05 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 124 of 1086 (866025)
11-04-2019 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Phat
11-04-2019 12:01 PM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
Why must I accept what Genesis 2-3 says as absolute truth the way that you present it?
It isn't something I'm "presenting". It's what it says. And nobody gives a flying fuck whether you accept it or not.
Phat writes:
I have every right to interpret the book the way that I feel it should be interpreted.
And I have every right to point out that your interpretation is made up.
Phat writes:
You can't hold my feet to the fire that you are creating by attempting to explain what a particular passage means.
I sure can. Watch me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:01 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 125 of 1086 (866026)
11-04-2019 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Phat
11-04-2019 12:05 PM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
How can we trust evidence that we ourselves create?
That's my question to you: Since your belief is made up - i.e. not based on scripture - i.e. often in direct contradiction of scripture - how can you trust it? As Jesus said, your house is built on sand.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:05 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:14 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 127 of 1086 (866028)
11-04-2019 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Phat
11-04-2019 12:14 PM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
I was born again. May it please the court to tell the prosecutor to sit down? He is complicating the proceedings. Or do you consider yourself the judge, too? I can watch you make a mockery of the judicial system. You need to learn humility. That's why God even sits where he sits. You are not Jesus. And the Judge sits over there. He is not some character in a book.
Stop preaching. Discuss the topic honestly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:14 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:19 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 130 of 1086 (866031)
11-04-2019 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Phat
11-04-2019 12:19 PM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
I am being honest. God is not made up.
You believe that God is not made up.
It is a fact that God is a character in a book. You can believe that he is something more, but that is only a belief, like the belief in Tooth Fairies or unicorns.
Phat writes:
Unless the prosecution has evidence to the contrary, I suggest they need a recess.
I don't need a recess. So far, you haven't presented much of a case. Maybe you should stop being so arrogant about your apologetics and actually present something of substance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:19 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:27 PM ringo has replied
 Message 134 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:31 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 136 of 1086 (866037)
11-04-2019 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Phat
11-04-2019 12:27 PM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
By what standard is honesty judged?
Reality.
Phat writes:
In what context?
In this venue, the context is the Bible. Are the apologists telling the truth about the Bible?
This is not rocket surgery. I'm just asking you to explain in your own words why Genesis 2-3, for example, doesn't "mean" what it says. If there's any merit at all to your position, why can't you explain it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:27 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 137 of 1086 (866039)
11-04-2019 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Phat
11-04-2019 12:31 PM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
My point of contention with you and jar is that you ruin the story by making the snake out to be a hero and God out to be flawed.
How does that "ruin" the story? Why doesn't conflating the snake with some Satan character in another book ruin the story?
Phat writes:
That isn't Christianity....
Of course not. Why would it be?
The story is much older than Christianity. Why does (your brand of) Christianity get to mangle the story for its own purposes?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 12:31 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 1:01 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 140 of 1086 (866042)
11-04-2019 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Phat
11-04-2019 1:01 PM


Re: Bart Campolo
Phat writes:
Which story?
Duh. The story we're talking about. The story of the snake.
Phat writes:
The story i read has God at the very beginning and has Jesus there too.
That's not "a" story. That's two entirely separate stories. The part about Jesus being there at the beginning is made-up apologetics. It's what you're supposedly trying to defend here. It is not a foregone conclusion.
Phat writes:
What story are you referring to? The human story?
If you're going to claim to be honest, at least read the post you're replying to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 1:01 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 3:33 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 159 of 1086 (866085)
11-05-2019 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by Phat
11-04-2019 3:33 PM


Re: Snakes & Snails & Puppy Dog Tails
Phat writes:
I am simply agreeing with those who share a love of the stories...
They may love the versions that they've made up but they don't love the stories as written.
Phat writes:
... and who claim to have an overall insight into the Author(or authors, editors, and redactors) behind the stories.
That's where they're wrong. You can't have an "overall insight" on a group of individual books.
Phat writes:
None of us know what was going through the mind of the first goat herder to tell a story.
But we do know what the story actually says.
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
The part about Jesus being there at the beginning is made-up apologetics.
Not according to the gospel of John. It clearly says that God was in the beginning and the Word was with God and was God.
It says no such thing. Jesus is not mentioned at all.
Phat writes:
Perhaps you could argue that this clearly does not mean Jesus, but who then would it mean?
It doesn't say anything about a "who". It says "the Word". That's a "what".
Phat writes:
You seem to have a problem with anything that is believed as if it were made up.
No. I have a problem with things that are obviously made up.
Phat writes:
Snakes are not usually calming influences which is why I find your conclusion that this snake told the truth puzzling unless you are simply defending what is plainly written.
Of course I am defending what is plainly written. I have said so many times.
The story explains why (supposedly) snakes are unsettling.
You have no basis for being puzzled that the snake told the truth because the snake plainly told the truth.
Phat writes:
In which case I would ask you why you don't relate to the god character and relate more to the snake of whom it was told
It has nothing to do with relating to one character or another. It's about what the story says.
Phat writes:
Now, to be fair, we can attempt to find an answer why this God character would be mad at the snake which allegedly told the truth.
You don't have to look very far. It's pretty common to be angry when one's lies are exposed.
Phat writes:
We could then tie the snake's purpose....
There's no need to speculate about the snake's purpose. He doesn't need an excuse to tell the truth.
Phat writes:
But to say that the God character lied is quibbling with semantics.
On the contrary. Claiming that "on the day" means years in the future is quibbling with semantics. "Spiritual death" is quibbling with semantics.
Phat writes:
the apologists have a good explanation that it was spiritual death. This is also supportable by the fact that the God character cursed the snake for what it said.
How is that a "good explanation"? What does cursing the snake have to do with humans' spiritual death?
Phat writes:
I would also submit that we don't simply create Gods to serve us, do we?
Of course we do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Phat, posted 11-04-2019 3:33 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 160 of 1086 (866086)
11-05-2019 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by Faith
11-05-2019 9:45 AM


Re: The whole world likes noodles
Faith writes:
My "cult" is mainstream Protestantism or evangelicalism...
The main stream of Christianity is Roman Catholicism. Protestantism would be a fairly big stream if it was all one stream but in fact it's many small streams, with evangelicalism as one if its less-significant rivulets. The noisy rapids don't carry the most water.
Faith writes:
I've got to stop posting since Percy is extirpating ordinary words.
Oddly enough, I almost never get censored. Maybe you just need to choose your words more carefully.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Faith, posted 11-05-2019 9:45 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 11-05-2019 6:02 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 164 of 1086 (866107)
11-05-2019 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Faith
11-05-2019 6:02 PM


Re: The RCC saves nobody
Faith writes:
And what words do you think I'm not choosing carefully enough?
I'm saying that YOU should think carefully about the words you use. Then you might not post the kind of stupid drivel in the rest of your post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 11-05-2019 6:02 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Faith, posted 11-06-2019 10:25 AM ringo 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