Freethought & Rationalism Archive

-Jay- · 10-09-2007, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Banks

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

You've got me very interested in seeing these videos now.

I'd be very interested in hearing your reaction to it, if you ever get a chance. It pretty well freaked me out. I must confess, I did not watch the entire series but I made it through half the episodes and that was all I could take. It was tough to commit a whole Friday night every week for 12 weeks for this, even though it was somewhat fascinating.

I once sat through a strange little film called Jesus Christ, Vampire Hunter. I can probably manage anything. (Side note - JC, VH: Worst. Movie. Ever.)

I may have to see if I can find these things...

regards,

NinJay

VoxRat · 10-09-2007, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

...
I once sat through a strange little film called Jesus Christ, Vampire Hunter. I can probably manage anything. (Side note - JC, VH: Worst. Movie. Ever.)
...NinJay

I don't know... according to this review at "badmovies.com" JC,VH looks like a potentially interesting film - given sufficient pharmacological preparation.

(Which reminds me a little of a stoner friend I had many years back who used to regularly toke up and tune in to Kathryn Kuhlman, a bizarre televangelist faith-healer with a hairdo that always put me in mind of a bright orange d-orbital. Ah, memories.)

-Jay- · 10-09-2007, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VoxRat

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

...
I once sat through a strange little film called Jesus Christ, Vampire Hunter. I can probably manage anything. (Side note - JC, VH: Worst. Movie. Ever.)
...NinJay

I don't know... according to this review at "badmovies.com" JC,VH looks like a potentially interesting film - given sufficient pharmacological preparation.

(Which reminds me a little of a stoner friend I had many years back who used to regularly toke up and tune in to Kathryn Kuhlman, a bizarre televangelist faith-healer with a hairdo that always put me in mind of a bright orange d-orbital. Ah, memories.)

ObDisclosure: My viewing of JC, VH was conducted pursuant to the consumption of 1 (one) six-pack of Bass & Co. Pale Ale. Perhaps that was insufficient.

It's currently on loan to one or the other of my brothers, but I'd be willing to send it on an extended pass-around if there's any interest. (You're on you own for the previously mentioned preparatory pharma.)

regards,

NinJay

Toto · 10-12-2007, 02:21 PM

More on apologetic arguments: Penn Christian Union

scroll down to "Penn Apologetics Lesson: Guest Lecturer Trains Young Evangelists"

Quote:

. . .

“The most important part of apologetics is not about giving the right answers, but living a life that oozes Jesus,” said Kunkle. “It’s about being an ambassador for Christ.”

. . .

According to Kunkle, Christians must realize that the burden of proof lies with the non-Christian, in order to overcome intimidation in the face of brilliant non-Christians. In fact, he argues, all the good reasons are on the side of faith. Contrary to popular belief, faith is not ignorance. It is making a rational decision to trust, to rest and to receive Christ.

. . .

Christians need not feel that eloquence or a profound knowledge of the Bible are requisite for successful apologetics. Sometimes successful apologetics require no more than making people realize that they don’t have all the answers they thought they did, and showing people the emptiness of a life without Christ.

This Penn group passed out "survival kits" to students that contained two books by Josh McDowell.

VoxRat · 10-12-2007, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

More on apologetic arguments: Penn State Christian Union

That's not Penn State - that's the University of Pennsylvania. Despite it's "state university" sounding name, UoP is a private, "Ivy League" university.

Toto · 10-12-2007, 03:44 PM

I stand corrected. thanks

-Jay- · 10-12-2007, 03:44 PM

[quote=Toto;4861687]More on apologetic arguments: Penn State Christian Union

scroll down to "Penn Apologetics Lesson: Guest Lecturer Trains Young Evangelists"

Quote:

. . .

“The most important part of apologetics is not about giving the right answers, but living a life that oozes Jesus,” said Kunkle. “It’s about being an ambassador for Christ.”

Oozes Jesus? They have a shot for that now. It'll clear it right up.

Quote:

. . .

According to Kunkle, Christians must realize that the burden of proof lies with the non-Christian, in order to overcome intimidation in the face of brilliant non-Christians. In fact, he argues, all the good reasons are on the side of faith. Contrary to popular belief, faith is not ignorance. It is making a rational decision to trust, to rest and to receive Christ.

This is revealing. Note the subtle reappropriation of the term "Christian". "Non-Chrisitian" actually means "anyone not adhering to a core set of fundamentalist beliefs, including Catholics, Anglicans, Episcopalians..." It also reveals a smug self assurance and arrogance.

Quote:

. . .

Christians need not feel that eloquence or a profound knowledge of the Bible are requisite for successful apologetics. Sometimes successful apologetics require no more than making people realize that they don’t have all the answers they thought they did, and showing people the emptiness of a life without Christ.

Note the skillful creation of a false dichotomy here - They don't have all the answers, therefore we do. Of course, the first sentence explains a lot on it's own...

Quote:

This Penn State group passed out "survival kits" to students that contained two books by Josh McDowell.

He just turns up everywhere, doesn't he?

Thanks, Toto. I appreciate the link.

regards,

NinJay

sky4it · 10-13-2007, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Constant Mews

It is completely impossible to reason one's way to the Christian faith from observation of the natural world.

Only if you decide to keep both eyes shut. II Peter 3:8 and Albert Einstein all the way baby.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Constant Mews

[The effect of this problem is endless heresy, cults, divisions, and people such as Dave.

There are about as many divisions as there are differing views on evolution who have differing names for their sects and that which they believe. Looks like the sceince of evolution even has there own heretics eh? you know saltuationists, speedists, etc etc.

Don't go joining some group now that wants to catch a comet or something, k? :huh:

-Jay- · 10-13-2007, 01:45 PM

Hey, sky4it. Glad to see you popped over here.

What I'm personally hoping to get from this thread is a sense of just why people believe what they do. In my experience, it seems that for every person who can honestly say "I've thought hard about my beliefs, investigated them, questioned them, and reasoned my way to where I am now" there are several who can't say anything more definite than "well, that's what Mom and Dad believed" or "that's what my pastor says". To me, those are both very unsatisfying answers.

So, with that brief comment, please dive in. From what you've shown in other threads, you've got an interesting background, and I look forward to your thoughts on the subject at hand.

regards,

NinJay

Martian Astronomer · 10-13-2007, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericmurphy

To return to the "creationist mindset" subthread, I don't think they see it that way at all. I think they see it as "God gave us the truth in the Bible, and by steadfastly holding on to that truth, we've kept the faith. He's not lying to us - He's testing us. All you other miscreants have failed the test." The implication here is that the Bible somehow supersedes the creation itself. (Just for fun, raise the issue of whether the Bible is the fourth person in the Godhead and see what kind of response you get...)

While I think that this representation of the creationist mindset has some truth to it, it's important to note that apologists are frequently called to defend positions that are extrabiblical (i.e. the canonization and divine inspiration of the New Testament) as well as some that run contrary to parts of scripture (i.e., claiming that Romans 9 does not go against the idea of free will.) Apologists, of course will not admit this. However, I think that the fact that apologists defend doctrines that have been put upon them due to social pressure speaks to the extent which social factors within their community influence their interest in apologetics.

Having known a few amateur and semi-professional apologists, I think that many (though not all) of them are subconsciously motivated by the social esteem that comes with the title of "apologist." In a fundamentalist social group, being an apologist is somewhat of a "warrior" role.

That's my 2 cents.

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

10-12-2007, 03:44 PM	#56
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	I stand corrected. thanks

10-13-2007, 01:45 PM	#59
-Jay- Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Eastern U.S. Posts: 4,157	Hey, sky4it. Glad to see you popped over here. What I'm personally hoping to get from this thread is a sense of just why people believe what they do. In my experience, it seems that for every person who can honestly say "I've thought hard about my beliefs, investigated them, questioned them, and reasoned my way to where I am now" there are several who can't say anything more definite than "well, that's what Mom and Dad believed" or "that's what my pastor says". To me, those are both very unsatisfying answers. So, with that brief comment, please dive in. From what you've shown in other threads, you've got an interesting background, and I look forward to your thoughts on the subject at hand. regards, NinJay

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.