Freethought & Rationalism Archive

notMichaelJackson · 01-25-2003, 01:30 PM

At www.faithforum.org/challenge, a Christian website dedicated to debate between Christians and non-Chrisitians, it is stated in the introduction: An intellectual group of Christians and skeptics seeking to productively debate the merits of Christianity. Challenge exists to facilitate the removal of pseudo-intellectual obstacles blocking the mind from the truth of Jesus Christ.

At the General Apologetics area of www.christianforums.com, which I know some of you visit, the introduction is:The branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines with non-believers.

Aren't they a tad bit overconfident in their beliefs? They can't be wrong?

Mageth · 01-25-2003, 01:49 PM

Well, they have to believe it's the truth. If they don't, their free pass into heaven won't work when they get to the gate.

beoba · 01-25-2003, 01:50 PM

It'd be harder to sell if they didn't assume it was right.

notMichaelJackson · 01-25-2003, 01:52 PM

It's ok to see what you believe in (or don't) as correct, but 100% infallible?

Mageth · 01-25-2003, 02:25 PM

I think that if you talked to Christians, you'd find that many if not most believe there's a core set of beliefs that one must hold as "100% infallible" to be classified as a "true" Christian (though there's quite a bit of controversy on what this core set includes), and another non-critical set of beliefs of which one has some latitude on. Examples of the former is the divinity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity (though some that classify themselves as Christians differ even on these "core" beliefs); examples of the latter are end-times beliefs, miracles, glossalalia (sp), etc.

So I don't think it's correct to characterize Christians as generally holding that all their beliefs are "100% infallible."

beyelzu · 01-26-2003, 02:56 PM

I just tried to post something at faithforum, it said that my post will appear once its been viewed and found acceptable by a moderator?

what the fuck?

Amie · 01-26-2003, 06:01 PM

Would you rather it have said:

Quote:

An intellectual group of Christians and skeptics seeking to productively debate the merits of Christianity. Challenge exists to facilitate the removal of pseudo-intellectual obstacles blocking the mind from the enduring myth of Jesus Christ.

and

Quote:

The branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the hysterically funny fantasy of Christian doctrines with non-believers.

Blake · 01-26-2003, 06:09 PM

Since this seems more of a jocoserious than purely jocose reply, I'll point out that it contains the fallacies of false dichotomy and appeal to ridicule.

seebs · 01-26-2003, 06:51 PM

Well, obviously, we think it's true, or we wouldn't be Christians. So, within that context, yeah, of course we act as though it's true. What else would we do?

Yeah, I could be wrong. Anyone could be wrong - but that doesn't mean we don't, in practice, act as though our best hypothesis is "true".

seesaw · 01-26-2003, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amie
Would you rather it have said:

and

01-25-2003, 01:30 PM	#1
notMichaelJackson Banned Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: IL Posts: 552	Confident Christianity? At www.faithforum.org/challenge, a Christian website dedicated to debate between Christians and non-Chrisitians, it is stated in the introduction: An intellectual group of Christians and skeptics seeking to productively debate the merits of Christianity. Challenge exists to facilitate the removal of pseudo-intellectual obstacles blocking the mind from the truth of Jesus Christ. At the General Apologetics area of www.christianforums.com, which I know some of you visit, the introduction is:The branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth* of Christian doctrines with non-believers.* Aren't they a tad bit overconfident in their beliefs? They can't be wrong?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-25-2003, 01:49 PM	#2
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Well, they have to believe it's the truth. If they don't, their free pass into heaven won't work when they get to the gate.

01-25-2003, 01:50 PM	#3
beoba Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Boston Posts: 699	It'd be harder to sell if they didn't assume it was right.

01-25-2003, 01:52 PM	#4
notMichaelJackson Banned Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: IL Posts: 552	It's ok to see what you believe in (or don't) as correct, but 100% infallible?

01-25-2003, 02:25 PM	#5
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	I think that if you talked to Christians, you'd find that many if not most believe there's a core set of beliefs that one must hold as "100% infallible" to be classified as a "true" Christian (though there's quite a bit of controversy on what this core set includes), and another non-critical set of beliefs of which one has some latitude on. Examples of the former is the divinity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity (though some that classify themselves as Christians differ even on these "core" beliefs); examples of the latter are end-times beliefs, miracles, glossalalia (sp), etc. So I don't think it's correct to characterize Christians as generally holding that all their beliefs are "100% infallible."

01-26-2003, 02:56 PM	#6
beyelzu Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: the peach state ga I am a metaphysical naturalist Posts: 2,869	I just tried to post something at faithforum, it said that my post will appear once its been viewed and found acceptable by a moderator? what the fuck?

01-26-2003, 06:09 PM	#8
Blake Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: N/A Posts: 349	Since this seems more of a jocoserious than purely jocose reply, I'll point out that it contains the fallacies of false dichotomy and appeal to ridicule.

01-26-2003, 06:51 PM	#9
seebs Contributor Join Date: May 2002 Location: Saint Paul, MN Posts: 24,524	Well, obviously, we think it's true, or we wouldn't be Christians. So, within that context, yeah, of course we act as though it's true. What else would we do? Yeah, I could be wrong. Anyone could be wrong - but that doesn't mean we don't, in practice, act as though our best hypothesis is "true".

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.