Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Zenaphobe · 07-13-2011, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Credibility is not my purview.

My belief is not based in scholarship, argument, apologetcs, laboratory proof, etc. And it likewise will not be unseated by them.

These comments live up to all my stereotypes perfectly :rolling:

Perhaps we could begin a poll to see if anyone who was part of this thread feels like they have gained a inexplicable inner certainty concerning whether the Bible contains contradictions or not?

Whatever magic it is that has simon in its grip just hasn't tingled my toes after reading his purview.

If it isn't about "scholarship, argument, apologetcs, laboratory proof, etc.", it must be about blind faith. What else is there at this point?:huh:

dockeen · 07-13-2011, 07:18 AM

Quote:

What else is there at this point?

The "Voice of god"?

simon kole · 07-13-2011, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perspicuo

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perspicuo

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

If you are referring to my responses to contradictions, that would be because what Jesus says shows the texts, in their own terms, not to be contradictory

Not in their own terms. Theologians justify contradictions between OT (e.g. "Eye for an eye") and Jesus (e.g. "Give the other cheek"). Left alone (i.e. Left on their "own terms") they contradict --theology's task is to justify no matter how many and how convoluted the verbal contortions require.

"In their own terms" includes in light of all Scripture. The NT reports that Jesus said he possessed all authority in heaven and earth (Mt 28:18; Jn 13:3). "All" would include the authority to legislate. His legislation is the new law of the new order of the new covenant reported in the NT.

Premises (1st set):
a) He has the authority to change his mind;
b) He said he wouldn't change his mind;
c) He changed his mind;
Therefore:
d) b & c are a contradiction.

Premises (2nd set):
d) b & c are a contradiction (as reached above);
e) He is omniscient;
f) Therefore He knew he would contradict himself
Conclusion:
g) He lied
[ h) ... even if he had the authority to lie, still he lied. ]

Premise (3nd set):
i) God by definition cannot lie;
Conclusion:
j) The Bible is false.

(I guess my logical procedure is not orthodox, maybe our friends from the philosophy sub-forum could correct the structure to set it to standard of well formed)

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

In other words: Cheating. And people know this. That is one of the reasons why Christianity is losing people (except in some countries where it's new, though mathematically, if it's never been there it has nothing to lose).

The NT reports that Jesus said his church would be here until the end of time (Mt 16:18).

So now we're preaching. I thought you said that was out of your "purview". But we both knew it wasn't all along, right?

It concerns the texts, which are my purview.

Deus Ex · 07-13-2011, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenaphobe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank

These comments live up to all my stereotypes perfectly :rolling:

Perhaps we could begin a poll to see if anyone who was part of this thread feels like they have gained a inexplicable inner certainty concerning whether the Bible contains contradictions or not?

Whatever magic it is that has simon in its grip just hasn't tingled my toes after reading his purview.

If it isn't about "scholarship, argument, apologetcs, laboratory proof, etc.", it must be about blind faith. What else is there at this point?:huh:

Since Simon is a Calvinist, I would say that from his perspective it's all about whether your mind has been "regenerated" or not. If you uncritically believe everything written in the bible, then that is evidence (to Simon) that your fallen mind has now been regenerated by the Holy Specter. If you see contradictions and inconsistencies, then that is just evidence that you are relying on your limited and fallen human reasoning skills alone. Unaided reason won't get you into Simon's exclusive club.

dockeen · 07-13-2011, 08:23 AM

Quote:

It concerns the texts, which are my purview.

But not the logical proposition I note.

dockeen · 07-13-2011, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Ex

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenaphobe

Perhaps we could begin a poll to see if anyone who was part of this thread feels like they have gained a inexplicable inner certainty concerning whether the Bible contains contradictions or not?

Whatever magic it is that has simon in its grip just hasn't tingled my toes after reading his purview.

If it isn't about "scholarship, argument, apologetcs, laboratory proof, etc.", it must be about blind faith. What else is there at this point?:huh:

Since Simon is a Calvinist, I would say that from his perspective it's all about whether your mind has been "regenerated" or not. If you uncritically believe everything written in the bible, then that is evidence (to Simon) that your fallen mind has now been regenerated by the Holy Specter. If you see contradictions and inconsistencies, then that is just evidence that you are relying on your limited and fallen human reasoning skills alone. Unaided reason won't get you into Simon's exclusive club.

The exclusivity of the Calvinist club, and the obvious pride members of the
club feel (but just as humorously deny) certainly may account for why they
post here, with the flow of "here's the truth, if you believe it or not is
of no real concern to me, it's the truth".

I find it - interesting, the contrast between the "going through the motions"
presentation of the "truth", and their supposed focus on love of their
fellow man. They come across as a seeing themselves as a relgion
version of Dr. House.

simon kole · 07-13-2011, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Ex

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenaphobe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank

These comments live up to all my stereotypes perfectly :rolling:

Perhaps we could begin a poll to see if anyone who was part of this thread feels like they have gained a inexplicable inner certainty concerning whether the Bible contains contradictions or not?

Whatever magic it is that has simon in its grip just hasn't tingled my toes after reading his purview.

If it isn't about "scholarship, argument, apologetcs, laboratory proof, etc.", it must be about blind faith. What else is there at this point?:huh:

Since Simon is a Calvinist, I would say that from his perspective it's all about whether your mind has been "regenerated" or not. If you uncritically believe everything written in the bible, then that is evidence (to Simon) that your fallen mind has now been regenerated by the Holy Specter. If you see contradictions and inconsistencies, then that is just evidence that you are relying on your limited and fallen human reasoning skills alone. Unaided reason won't get you into Simon's exclusive club.

I don't take my understanding of Scripture from Calvin. I am not a "Calvinist."

I take my understanding of Scripture from the Bible, and my understanding of the sovereignty of God primarily from Paul.

Seeing immaterial contradictions and inconsistencies are not evidence of relying on human reasoning skills alone. However, you are correct that unaided reason cannot "see" the kingdom of God.

simon kole · 07-13-2011, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dockeen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Ex

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenaphobe

Perhaps we could begin a poll to see if anyone who was part of this thread feels like they have gained a inexplicable inner certainty concerning whether the Bible contains contradictions or not?

Whatever magic it is that has simon in its grip just hasn't tingled my toes after reading his purview.

If it isn't about "scholarship, argument, apologetcs, laboratory proof, etc.", it must be about blind faith. What else is there at this point?:huh:

Since Simon is a Calvinist, I would say that from his perspective it's all about whether your mind has been "regenerated" or not. If you uncritically believe everything written in the bible, then that is evidence (to Simon) that your fallen mind has now been regenerated by the Holy Specter. If you see contradictions and inconsistencies, then that is just evidence that you are relying on your limited and fallen human reasoning skills alone. Unaided reason won't get you into Simon's exclusive club.

The exclusivity of the Calvinist club, and the obvious pride members of the
club feel (but just as humorously deny)

Ascribing stereotypical motives again. . .is that a prideful way of being superior?

Quote:

post here,

If you don't want posts about the Bible in this forum, then don't open threads about the Bible in this forum.

Quote:

with the flow of "here's the truth, if you believe it or not is
of no real concern to me, it's the truth".

Why are those who deny the existence of God so focused on him? Hmmm. . .trying to convince themselves. . .trying to overcome the testimony of their own conscience?

Quote:

I find it - interesting, the contrast between the "going through the motions"
presentation of the "truth", and their supposed focus on love of their
fellow man.

They are doing you a service, enabling you to feel superior to them.

Quote:

They come across as a seeing themselves as a relgion
version of Dr. House.

Deus Ex · 07-13-2011, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

I don't take my understanding of Scripture from Calvin. I am not a "Calvinist."

You may eschew the label, but your beliefs appear to be synonymous with what we call Calvinism.

Quote:

I take my understanding of Scripture from the Bible, and my understanding of the sovereignty of God primarily from Paul.

Yes, we all know that evangelicals have a Paul fetish.

Quote:

Seeing immaterial contradictions and inconsistencies are not evidence of relying on human reasoning skills alone.

Seeing contradictions and inconsistencies is evidence of having basic reading comprehension skills.

Quote:

However, you are correct that unaided reason cannot "see" the kingdom of God.

Oh well. I guess Jesus just doesn't care about most folks, since he refuses to send spiritual aid to the majority of mankind?

dockeen · 07-13-2011, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Ascribing stereotypical motives again. . .is that a prideful way of being superior?

Yep. That's me.

Quote:

Why are those who deny the existence of God so focused on him

Very interesting. That's a mistake rhutchin repeatedly made. I never said I was an atheist.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.