(October 21, 2015 at 10:45 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(October 21, 2015 at 12:38 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: And I've seen nothing from you that would make me believe that you ever even attempt to view the Bible outside its own self-referential loop. Circular reasoning and unsupported assertions are all you appear to have. People who view everything from inside the loop and people who don't will inevitably have different ideas about what "understanding the Bible" means.

 What exactly am I to look at outside a book that is based on a spiritual relationship with God, it's not intended to be a complete book of history nor science, it actually opposes some of what we understand in the physical world, it's a book about how God planed and plans to deal with mankind.

GC

You basically just made my point for me. Someone who is convinced that the Bible is "based on a spiritual relationship with God" and his plans (more mere assertions from inside the loop) and is firmly locked into that view will never see any reason to read the book as an artifact of bronze- and iron-age people of a certain region. For you, it is (must be) your god's eternal word, embarrassing factual errors and all. So discussing with you, for example, the evolving views on Jesus Christ as found in the NT is pointless, since you are not inclined to even recognize that such was the case. The Gospels just get conflated in your reading: they're all true and just express the truth through different narrative means. The same with Paul. Etc., etc.

You will always reach an impasse with people who aren't already on the same page as you and who recognize your scriptural "truth" claims for what they are: the results of circular reasoning.

(October 20, 2015 at 7:56 pm)Thena323 Wrote: Am I only one who thinks it would be great to see more threads started by some of the established theists on these forums? 

I'm not trying to be snooty or discourage theists that have recently joined from participating, but there has been a massive influx of new members starting threads that are just insane.

It would be nice to see more conversations started by theists who know what they're talking about and happen to be familiar with the rules of engagement. 

Just a thought.

I actually thought the same thing Thena reading some of the new "theist" threads.  I've got one in the works.  I don't like posting threads carelessly, so I need to process my thoughts on it and plan accordingly so the discussion will be interesting and have some legs.  

(October 22, 2015 at 1:19 pm)lkingpinl Wrote:

(October 20, 2015 at 7:56 pm)Thena323 Wrote: Am I only one who thinks it would be great to see more threads started by some of the established theists on these forums? 

I'm not trying to be snooty or discourage theists that have recently joined from participating, but there has been a massive influx of new members starting threads that are just insane.

It would be nice to see more conversations started by theists who know what they're talking about and happen to be familiar with the rules of engagement. 

Just a thought.

I actually thought the same thing Thena reading some of the new "theist" threads.  I've got one in the works.  I don't like posting threads carelessly, so I need to process my thoughts on it and plan accordingly so the discussion will be interesting and have some legs.  

...and a skirt around it's ankles. 

(October 22, 2015 at 1:21 pm)houseofcantor Wrote:

(October 22, 2015 at 1:19 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: I actually thought the same thing Thena reading some of the new "theist" threads.  I've got one in the works.  I don't like posting threads carelessly, so I need to process my thoughts on it and plan accordingly so the discussion will be interesting and have some legs.  

...and a skirt around it's ankles. 

Whatever floats your boat.

(October 21, 2015 at 11:26 pm)Thena323 Wrote:

(October 21, 2015 at 10:28 pm)Godschild Wrote:  I don't expect any atheist to accept the entire Bible, what I would expect is an honest look at what Christians say. I wanted to avoid this phrase but I guess in the end it's not possible, "cherry picking," is no way to try and understand the Bible, I've tried to avoid "cherry picking" scientific books and haven't used any such practice here. Most all the teachings in scripture cover more than one book and many cover both the OT and NT. Most atheist just get mad when accused of "cherry picking" instead of trying to understand the whole of the teaching through many verses and books. Would you use this practice in school studies, of coarse not, it's no way to learn.

GC

It's difficult to not "cherry pick" when something is presented as the inerrant and/or infallible Word of God. Can you really fault atheists for drawing attention to Biblical inaccuracies and inconsistencies when you consider the claim of it being The Absolute Truth? Even maintaining that the Bible is simply God's infallible word, written by fallible men presents a major plot hole, doesn't it?

 Actually no, there isn't a plot hole, man penned what God inspired them to write. I asked if you would "cherry pick" school studies, I noticed you did not happen to mention that, must have been an over site. When someone "cherry picks" any works they can find supposed inconsistencies and or inaccuracies. Like I said when a supposed inaccuracies or contradiction is found does one stop and accept it or does one dig deeper and find the truth, I did when I found what seemed wrong in the Bible and always found the truth, I was wrong and the Bible was right, I'm still doing that to this day with the Bible. When anyone has stated they have found an inaccuracy or contradiction in the Bible and it came to my attention I always showed how it wasn't true and gave an explanation and sometimes other verses to support the verses as truth. When scientist run into an apparent contradiction in their work, do they stop and say well seems we are wrong this contradiction says so, no they go on looking to find the truth what ever it may be. So, again I say "cherry picking" is a cheap and dishonest way to discredit any works, period.

GC

(October 22, 2015 at 8:50 am)Mr Greene Wrote:

(October 21, 2015 at 12:22 pm)Godschild Wrote: God created the laws they are his to circumvent.

GC

Why should anyone be above the law? Are you not making the case for some form of divine Magna Carta right here?

 I'll answer this one because of a misunderstanding of what I meant, my fault in the way I wrote the statement.  The "laws of nature" is what I meant, God created them and can circumvent them as He pleases. Such as making an ax head float, for us this would be an impossibility and impossible to understand.

GC

@ Thena323, even the new atheist do the same thing, that's coming here and making insane threads, I believe those on both sides just want to get noticed, for some reason they must feel they need the attention and some probably come here with an attitude they're going to show everyone they know more than everyone else, but I think mostly looking for attention they do not get in their life outside this forums. We should feel sorry for the ones who do this and do it without embarrassing them, they probably are fairly good people, just needy.

GC

(October 22, 2015 at 3:30 pm)Godschild Wrote: I asked if you would "cherry pick" school studies, I noticed you did not happen to mention that, must have been an over site.

No, I would not "cherry pick" facts presented to me in an instructional/academic setting. Claims are entirely different issue. The Bible is a claim, an extraordinary one, and it's completely reasonable to scrutinize claims of this magnitude. Whenever close scrutiny of anything is actively discouraged, it should give you pause to consider whether it's worthy of your confidence.

Quote: When someone "cherry picks" any works they can find supposed inconsistencies and or inaccuracies. Like I said when a supposed inaccuracies or contradiction is found does one stop and accept it or does one dig deeper and find the truth, I did when I found what seemed wrong in the Bible and always found the truth, I was wrong and the Bible was right, I'm still doing that to this day with the Bible. 

I would argue that the truth doesn't require facts to be turned on their head on a continual basis, in order to be considered as such.

Quote:When scientist run into an apparent contradiction in their work, do they stop and say well seems we are wrong this contradiction says so, no they go on looking to find the truth what ever it may be.

You may be on to something here. 
Be careful, GC. You argue the other side without even realizing it.  



*my change to bold font for emphasis

How about a little reverse Pascal's Wager?

What if you're wrong?

You just spent your one and only life worshipping and running around in the defence of absolutely nothing. You changed the way you live for no reason at all, and based your decisions and views of others on made up nonsense.

And you still might go to hell; just a different hell. You're sent there by the real God, who rewards those who don't believe in rumours about him, which make him out to be a jumped-up super human rather than a deity.

No free passes for any position.

(October 22, 2015 at 7:44 pm)robvalue Wrote: How about a little reverse Pascal's Wager?

What if you're wrong?

You just spent your one and only life worshipping and running around in the defence of absolutely nothing. You changed the way you live for no reason at all, and based your decisions and views of others on made up nonsense.

Studies on self-reported happiness tend to show that theists and atheists are about equal in happiness in wealthier nations, while theists are happier than atheists in poorer nations.