FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-30-2007, 03:30 AM   #31
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
It's a far cry from saying that one must be prejudiced against empirical evidence.
That's a very special meaning of bias. A meaning which nobody in this thread endorses - only you are claiming that we do.

Clearly, it is a prejudice in reading the bible if one has to believe in the bible to understand it.

Stop dodging this fact with more semantic games.
Sven is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 03:39 AM   #32
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,918
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
It's a far cry from saying that one must be prejudiced against empirical evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
That's a very special meaning of bias.
It's in precisely the context of the discussion.

Quote:
Clearly, it is a prejudice in reading the bible if one has to believe in the bible to understand it.
To properly understand how to play a violin, one has to play a violin. One cannot scream at a violin tutor that/who insists that you actually pick up a violin if you want to know how to play it.
Clouseau is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 03:41 AM   #33
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,918
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
Then you can't say which, if any, are Christians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
Umm, no. I can not say which ones are True Christians.
Quite so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau
But I don't think that Toto claims to be a Christian. That is the context, if you care to look.
Quote:
Toto's orignal statement was about Christians.
That's irrelevant, though.
Clouseau is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 04:05 AM   #34
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Quote:
Quote:
Clearly, it is a prejudice in reading the bible if one has to believe in the bible to understand it.
To properly understand how to play a violin, one has to play a violin. One cannot scream at a violin tutor that/who insists that you actually pick up a violin if you want to know how to play it.
To properly understand a book, one does not have to believe what it says. Neither do I have to believe that a violin is inspired by god to play it correctly. So your analogy is not only wrong, it's silly.
Sven is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 04:09 AM   #35
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
Umm, no. I can not say which ones are True Christians.
Quite so.
Which does not bother me, since I think the term "True Christian" is meaningless.

Quote:
Quote:
Toto's orignal statement was about Christians.
That's irrelevant, though.
Why it's irrlevant? You asked if "one" believes in the holy spirit, "one" in general meaning people, not a single person (Toto in this case?).
And you are essentially telling Toto that his point was irrlevant, without explaining why.
Sven is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 04:09 AM   #36
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,918
Default

[QUOTE=Sven;4497064]
Quote:
Quote:
Clearly, it is a prejudice in reading the bible if one has to believe in the bible to understand it.
To properly understand how to play a violin, one has to play a violin. One cannot scream at a violin tutor that/who insists that you actually pick up a violin if you want to know how to play it.
Quote:
To properly understand a book, one does not have to believe what it says.
One may have to do precisely that. Who can say?
Clouseau is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 04:11 AM   #37
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,918
Default

[QUOTE=Sven;4497072]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
Umm, no. I can not say which ones are True Christians.
Quite so.
Quote:
Which does not bother me, since I think the term "True Christian" is meaningless.
But others don't, of course.
Clouseau is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 04:12 AM   #38
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
That's a very special meaning of bias.
It's in precisely the context of the discussion.
Why do you keep claiming that we all mean something different than what we say we mean? That's not only silly, it's insulting.
Sven is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 04:13 AM   #39
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Oh my, this thread got mangled. I blundered with the quote function.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
Quote:
To properly understand a book, one does not have to believe what it says.
One may have to do precisely that. Who can say?
:huh: I've understood many books, several among them which I disagreed with.
Sven is offline  
Old 05-30-2007, 04:14 AM   #40
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
Which does not bother me, since I think the term "True Christian" is meaningless.
But others don't, of course.
Your point?
Sven is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:12 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.