Rational defense of Christianity?

[watchamadoodle]

I've been wondering this as well. I've looked around but most have rules that strongly hint that they can delete or ban you for not agreeing with them. Even in the open debate area those rules are there. I have no interest in going into such a place.

It's a shame IMO. To me, blasphemy is something like "Piss Christ"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Politely asking an honest question shouldn't offend anybody. I have seen several Christian websites that only allow Christian members, because apparently even the censored questions from atheists are too much for them.

One trick seems to be labeling as agnostic instead of atheist. Atheist really upsets them for some reason.

[vorlon13]

Agnostic might yet be swayed, atheist might contaminate a believer.

Logic of empire.

[Simon Moon]

Sometimes I see a post by a Christian who seems to know all the information and arguments that led me to atheism, but that person identifies as a Christian. I'm curious about how these people make that work, but if I try to ask questions, I usually get accused of breaking the forum's rules (maybe even blasphemy )

Is anybody aware of a forum with lots of rational Christians where the rules are reasonable? (Atheist forums usually have reasonable rules, but the few Christians who inhabit them are weird - sorry I don't know a nicer way to describe them. )

I have been banned from several Christian forums for doing nothing more than asking legitimate questions and pointing out logical fallacies.

I go out of my way to be as to be as nice as possible, not use any profanity, and not call anyone names. Yet I've been banned for honest discussion.

But as soon as I point out that Kalam CA, the teleological argument, the ontological arguments are flawed, I get banned.

I may try it again when I have some time.

[dyresand]

Sometimes I see a post by a Christian who seems to know all the information and arguments that led me to atheism, but that person identifies as a Christian. I'm curious about how these people make that work, but if I try to ask questions, I usually get accused of breaking the forum's rules (maybe even blasphemy )

Is anybody aware of a forum with lots of rational Christians where the rules are reasonable? (Atheist forums usually have reasonable rules, but the few Christians who inhabit them are weird - sorry I don't know a nicer way to describe them. )

I have been banned from several Christian forums for doing nothing more than asking legitimate questions and pointing out logical fallacies.

I go out of my way to be as to be as nice as possible, not use any profanity, and not call anyone names. Yet I've been banned for honest discussion.

But as soon as I point out that Kalam CA, the teleological argument, the ontological arguments are flawed, I get banned.

I may try it again when I have some time.

Asking questions that require the use of thinking or using brain cells hurt their faith. So i see why they would ban anyone asking a logical question that points out the issues with the religion and faith.

[watchamadoodle]

I've got no interest at all. What would I gain by being exposed to the usual apologetic arguments that I can just as well read here? I'm also not a missionary being interested in converting anyone, which would be a futile endeavor anyway if even established science isn't up to the job.

It just puzzles me. There are many areas of knowledge, so I understand a Christian who doesn't know the reasons to disbelieve Christianity. I don't understand Christians that know these reasons and even agree with them - like John Shelby Spong ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong ). I suppose I need to buy one of his books and read it.

[abaris]

It just puzzles me. There are many areas of knowledge, so I understand a Christian who doesn't know the reasons to disbelieve Christianity. I don't understand Christians that know these reasons and even agree with them - like John Shelby Spong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong). I suppose I need to buy one of his books and read it.

I guess, you mean this character, since you're wiki link actually leads nowhere.

John Shelby "Jack" Spong (born June 16, 1931) is a retired American bishop of the Episcopal Church. From 1979 to 2000 he was Bishop of Newark (based in Newark, New Jersey). He is a liberal Christian theologian, religion commentator and author. He calls for a fundamental rethinking of Christian belief away from theism and traditional doctrines.

You won't find people like him on any christian board, since he would be banned within a short period of time. The one thing I learned to understand about internet boards is that you usually don't find the moderates there in great numbers. Especially when it comes to politics or religion.

[watchamadoodle]

It just puzzles me. There are many areas of knowledge, so I understand a Christian who doesn't know the reasons to disbelieve Christianity. I don't understand Christians that know these reasons and even agree with them - like John Shelby Spong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong). I suppose I need to buy one of his books and read it.

I guess, you mean this character, since you're wiki link actually leads nowhere.

John Shelby "Jack" Spong (born June 16, 1931) is a retired American bishop of the Episcopal Church. From 1979 to 2000 he was Bishop of Newark (based in Newark, New Jersey). He is a liberal Christian theologian, religion commentator and author. He calls for a fundamental rethinking of Christian belief away from theism and traditional doctrines.

You won't find people like him on any christian board, since he would be banned within a short period of time. The one thing I learned to understand about internet boards is that you usually don't find the moderates there in great numbers. Especially when it comes to politics or religion.

Thanks, I fixed the link now so it should work. You are probably right that he would be banned.

I read a post yesterday by a Christian who characterized Genesis as a collection of myths rewritten with a monotheist spin. Accepting these kinds of ideas is a slippery slope for Christians IMO - where do you draw the line? Spong has a book showing how many of the gospel stories are rewrites of earlier Jewish Midrash (I haven't read the book - just the overview).

I've read some quotes from Episcopalian priests in "Caught in the Pulpit" by Dennett that were very confusing. They sounded just like strong atheists, but they insisted that they were still Christians.

[fr0d0]

There are plenty of open religious sites that unlike this one and other overtly prejudice sites are full of balanced and open discussion. religeousforums.com for example.

---

I read a post yesterday by a Christian who characterized Genesis as a collection of myths rewritten with a monotheist spin. Accepting these kinds of ideas is a slippery slope for Christians IMO - where do you draw the line? Spong has a book showing how many of the gospel stories are rewrites of earlier Jewish Midrash (I haven't read the book - just the overview).

I agree with those ideas too. So do some central Christian theologians. I don't see how it could be any other way, and rather than weaken the Christian position, I find it very much strengthens it.

[watchamadoodle]

There are plenty of open religious sites that unlike this one and other overtly prejudice sites are full of balanced and open discussion. religeousforums.com for example.

---

I read a post yesterday by a Christian who characterized Genesis as a collection of myths rewritten with a monotheist spin. Accepting these kinds of ideas is a slippery slope for Christians IMO - where do you draw the line? Spong has a book showing how many of the gospel stories are rewrites of earlier Jewish Midrash (I haven't read the book - just the overview).

I agree with those ideas too. So do some central Christian theologians. I don't see how it could be any other way, and rather than weaken the Christian position, I find it very much strengthens it.

The problem I see is analogous to evolution. Most Christians accept evolution, but they believe God's hand guided evolution. Fine, but then why add God to fill a gap that has already been filled by biology?

An enlightened Christian might accept that the Bible evolved in a way that looks suspiciously human, but they believe that God's hand inspired all these iterative changes. Then, in 500 AD or so, they freeze the Bible - no more changes - it's perfect now. Of course Christian theology continued to evolve through additional writings and creative interpretations of the Bible. Many Christians believe the Bible is "inerrant" in spite of its messy history.

So It all happened gradually with lots of extinct theologies along the way - just like every other religion in the world. There is no evidence for divine inspiration IMO. I don't see how Christians can know the history and not reach that conclusion.

[Spooky]

I've been wondering this as well. I've looked around but most have rules that strongly hint that they can delete or ban you for not agreeing with them. Even in the open debate area those rules are there. I have no interest in going into such a place.

It's a shame IMO. To me, blasphemy is something like "Piss Christ"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Politely asking an honest question shouldn't offend anybody. I have seen several Christian websites that only allow Christian members, because apparently even the censored questions from atheists are too much for them.

One trick seems to be labeling as agnostic instead of atheist. Atheist really upsets them for some reason.

Didn't know that existed. How odd.