Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 11-24-2006, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djrafikie

It does not state in the OP that this thread
has a purpose summed up as "discussing the bible as it is understood by the majority of christians".

I am also uninterested in discussing a case for christianity without the bible as I find all such discussions fairly easy to pull apart and don't have much interest in them.

What I was attempting to do was compare christianity to itself, in effect pointing out that discussing the original post in the light of the scriptural quotation is a straw man, as the validity of the original scriptural quote is questionable anyway.

In effect any assertion made about god and how he may or may not make decisions is flakey at best, and therefore and argument can either be based on the history of the bible and the obvious changes (which are ergo, not the word of god anyway and not worth discussing in that context) or purely on moral rather than scriptural grounds.

Every argument I have seen regarding this goes NOWHERE, so I thought I would contribute by adding a little bit of solid information regarding the reliablility of the text being discussed. Maybe the discussion will progress past throwing different bits of scripture at each other and pointificating on modern morals verus ancient moral systems and how god may or may not have "changed" because of the new Testament (blah blah, snore) until everyone gets bored and forgets all about it for another month.

You will not get anywhere at all with your approach, but you are certainly free to use it if you wish. I suggested that you start a new thread that deals specifically with your arguments because they deal with the entire Bible, not just homosexuality.

djrafikie · 11-24-2006, 05:03 AM

I'm sorry, the OP does'nt say anything about homosexuality.

EarlOfLade · 11-24-2006, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Based on the information provided in the Bible.

And we all know that the bible is not a good place to look for truth since it has been shown to be incorrect, false and filled with lies in many situations, so why not here?

Using the bible as a source for truth is useless.

djrafikie · 11-24-2006, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlOfLade

And we all know that the bible is not a good place to look for truth since it has been shown to be incorrect, false and filled with lies in many situations, so why not here?

Using the bible as a source for truth is useless.

Agreed, as a source of soci-historical and lingual information, it is a goldmine, but as a source of truth regarding the subject it covers, ironically, it is crap.

Johnny Skeptic · 11-24-2006, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djrafikie

I'm sorry, the OP doesn't say anything about homosexuality.

I got thread mixed up with the other thread that you are making posts in. Your approach is valid, but so is my approach. I prefer to argue about the detestable character of the God of the Bible. I have tried to debate inerrancy with rhutchin on a number of occasions, but even though he is an inerrantist, he conveniently always refuses to debate inerrancy. There were two recent threads on inerrancy at this forum, but rhutchin did not make one single post in either of them. I hope that he makes a post in my new thread on Calvinism.

djrafikie · 11-24-2006, 06:20 AM

Don't worry JS, I do it all the time!

I agree with you RE: destestable, but I prefer to go straight in with the "bible is a load of tripe" argument. As a (inevitable) outcome of the argument, we may as well START there, and see where ELSE we can go from there.

Johnny Skeptic · 11-24-2006, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djrafikie

Don't worry JS, I do it all the time!

I agree with you RE: destestable, but I prefer to go straight in with the "bible is a load of tripe" argument. As a (inevitable) outcome of the argument, we may as well START there, and see where ELSE we can go from there.

It will be interesting to read your debates with rhutchin.

hatsoff · 11-24-2006, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

If you mean my assumption, what is your interpretation of Romans 9:15?

It seems quite simple to me, actually. In Exodus 33 God says he is not subject to man's questioning. Paul uses the quotation to make his own point in Romans 9. A rational-minded person need not know the methods and reasoning of a diety who is all-powerful and all-knowing, because odds are the God knows better than the man.

djrafikie · 11-24-2006, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

It will be interesting to read your debates with rhutchin.

HA! I have attempted to have this discussion, but whenever I do he evaporates. I think proof for him is like citronella candles to mosquitoes.

hatsoff · 11-24-2006, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

No mentally competent being helps people and kills people.

Johnny, you previously indicated to me that you might be beginning to enjoy my banter after all. I share your sentiment. The reason I take issue with your posts is that you seem to be arguing for the sake of arguing. You take an openly hostile attitude towards those who disagree with your opinions. In *my* opinion, that's not good! I feel compelled to fight fire with fire, as it were, and so many of my responses to your posts have been likewise offensive. I am guilty of slipping into that all too often, and I am sorry. However, I must still disagree with you. Your posts seem aimed at slamming Rhutchin, not at debunking his arguments. So I take issue. I disagree with him, as well, but he was not the one to present his opinions as fact. I hope you see what I mean.

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

11-24-2006, 05:03 AM	#22
djrafikie Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: u.k, back of beyond, we have scones and cream teas Posts: 2,534	I'm sorry, the OP does'nt say anything about homosexuality.

11-24-2006, 06:20 AM	#26
djrafikie Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: u.k, back of beyond, we have scones and cream teas Posts: 2,534	Don't worry JS, I do it all the time! I agree with you RE: destestable, but I prefer to go straight in with the "bible is a load of tripe" argument. As a (inevitable) outcome of the argument, we may as well START there, and see where ELSE we can go from there.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.