rostau

At risk of derailing this thread, what you describe here has always puzzled me a little. I can't really understand Christians who are tolerant of non-Christians. It doesn't make sense. Surely if you are a Christian you have been instructed by Jesus to proselytize. You MUST convert the heathen. It's a religious obligation. There's no way around it. In this sense, nutcase fundamentalists are correct. Modern, gooey, tolerant Christians are bad Christians. (Again, I point out, me no Christian, me just wondering).

Psalm 13:5

I don't know how that reply had anything to do with the post you were quoting. I was not talking about this thread, I was talking about the site in general.

unknown4

Psalms 13:5, if possible, can we get back to the Egypt prophecy? From what I've read, the Egyptian Mamluk rulers conquered area west of Egypt (I don't know if there was a nation there or not at the time, to be honest), Palestine, Syria, the Kingdom of Lesser Armenia. They also conquered other areas, Mecca, Medina for instance. So, how does this all correlate with the claim that Egypt was to never again conquer the nations?

Once again, please look at this map at http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/maml/maml_d1map.htm and explain to me how that prophecy was fulfilled.

Thanks.

Vorkosigan

These are just evasions, Psalm. When you started posting here, you didn't know the first thing about logic, but you went in anyway. You don't know the first thing about the Bible and its history, but you waded into a debate on it anyway. Similarly, you're ignorant of the history of the west's missionary effort, but you went on to defend it.

To someone as ignorant as you are, Psalm, all knowledge looks like pride. But I'll tell you a secret: you're projecting. The one blinded by pride is you, yourself. This incredible tale of pride you've spun is simply the way you're trying to deal with the cognitive dissonance of finding out that the world is not as simpleminded as you thought it was. Like, for example, that Moses never wrote the Five Books, that missionaries do things like loot the dead bodies of those they demanded revenge on (see any balanced history of the Boxer Rebellion, Psalm), and that there are many different types of logic, some invented in quite recent times.

Vorkosigan

Psalm 13:5

LOL! Perfect example of what I said. Thank you for continuing to prove my point every time you open your mouth.

And now I really have to go. Bye, you all.

Vorkosigan

Good luck, Psalm.

Nectaris

What's wrong with taking pride in something one has worked for and achieved? As an atheist why should I be expected to agree with the Biblical perspective on anything, should I hold you to the standards of the Eddas? Don't worry about answering either of these questions as they are more rhetorical in nautre.

There are many people who have spent many more hours of study on certain subjects and have a greater deal of knowledge on those subjects than I could possibly possess. Instead of assuming people are my adversaries when they tell me I'm wrong about something, shouldn't I be willing to analyze my own argument for the possibility, however remote , that I could be wrong? I wouldn't want to let my pride interfere with my desire to learn new things.

If someone is willing to share his or her knowledge with me on a subject I don't know much about, and is willing to condense that knowledge that took him hours if not days, months, and years to discover into something I can read in 15 minutes, I'm very appreciative. Ideally, we are here to exchange information, not engage in petty battles or try to prove one another wrong. If I were to post something that was obviously not true and continued to post the same thing over and over again despite many posters attempt to correct me, who would be more prideful?

For example, if I went on the E/C board and said evolution is wrong because it evolution means that humans come from monkeys, would it be wrong for someone to tell me that I don't have the correct definition of evolution. If I continued in such an argument, even though I had been informed that I was wrong and provided with evidence to show how and where I was wrong, would that not be pride?

I think before anyone posts on any of these boards, one should be willing to enterain the fact that he or she may be wrong. If someone challenges your view on something, it should only either make you come up with better arguments to support your position or realize that you may have been mistaken.


There's something in Matthew chapter seven that addresses this issue, I think.

I could of course repeat the same words back at you but changing theism to atheism and vice-versa, but that's not a very convincing argument either. You are more than welcome to post your best arguments for any god over on the EoG forum. But I would suggest listening to people's arguments without assuming that they're wrong to begin with. I would apply this same standard to myself, as I would expect of anyone else.

Do you have a link to that particular thread? I don’t think anyone made a statement, like I’ve never made mistakes. Perhaps the authors of the above mentioned posts meant that they had never done wrong, using wrong as a synonym for sin. In that case it would be as easy for me to say I have never sinned as it would be to say that I’ve never ridden a unicorn.

On what scale are you measuring greatness? Are the people more moral than I am? Sure. Are the people who are smarter than I am? Yes. Do I recognize that I cannot selfishly attempt to get whatever I want without considering of how I could hurt others? Yes. To me nothing is inherently greater than something else, a volcano erupting can kill hundreds of people, my pet cockatiel cannot. Which is greater? Although I know a great deal more about Torts than my car mechanic, my knowledge doesn’t help me when my engine is making funny noises.

At least one good thing can be said about pride

Also while I was typing this, you posted that you were leaving, but since I typed the darn thing anyway, and I'm so full of . . ..

Good luck in whatever endeavor you choose.

Dave

Garnet

Two words: Cognitive dissonance.

blt to go

Psalm 13:5, gregor2 gave VERY good advice. It is unfortunate that you failed to heed it.

See, what you forget is that there are a number of lurkers of a variety of religous beliefs viewing these threads. This is one lurker that tallies the score as follows:

Careful Study POLITELY stated: 1
Name-calling, avoidance, hyperbole IMPOLITELY stated: 0

However, to the relevant statement.

Vorkosigan, Peter Kirby, Spin, rostau (and others on other threads) - Thank you. :thumbs:

I KNOW you have heard these arguments before. I KNOW it must become frustrating to say the same thing over and over, knowing the poster will probably be here for only a few weeks, and by next month a new poster will be saying the same thing. The same way. All over again.

But this is one lurker that actually DOES appreciate the responses, and even looks up the sites you provide. (Although I fear TRULY plowing through Mr. Kirbys may take a lifetime. )

French Prometheus

Well, I am myself a strong atheist and also quite anticlerical (I strongly oppose ANY meddling from religious organizations in political issues). However, I have nothing against people who merely believe something I think is completely false or whose interpretation of their own holy book appears to me as inconsistent. In France, religious convictions are very private and the topic never crops up in normal conversation. Under normal circumstances, witnessing or more generally trying to convert people is regarded as extremely inappropriate (or a sign of mental deficiency if you really keep talking about Jesus all the time). If someone is a law-abiding citizen who doesn't try to impose his beliefs and/or lifestyle on others then I don't care if his philosophical system is faulty and inconsistent. If he wants to debate then that's OK with me (I've had a few interesting debates here which have always been courteous and respectful). But if he respects others and just wants to be left alone then I'm not gonna push my convictions on him either. Just because I'm in the non-religious majority (which includes atheists, agnostics and deists) doesn't entitle me to bully religious people. When there's a controversial public debate (gay marriage, euthanesia, high school dress code,...) and some religious organizations try to push their agenda forward then I (and many, many others) oppose them. But I don't put all religious people under the same banner.

There are many ways of interpreting the Bible since it's full of contradictions and the theological gap between standard American Christians and standard European Christians is abysmal.