by Shining One 151 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I look forward to it, too, stevenyc. I'll mark my calendar. That should be about time for "Winter Solstice" as my JW hubby is so fond of saying...
As for brains exploding, DanTheMan, o-shining-one could only hope. His arrogant proclamations are mind-blowing for sure, but I think the result is clarity, not chaos.
What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem?
Dear athiests of the board, I would welcome a healthy, intelligent debate with YOU in a month or two
jgnat,
sounds awesome! i'll be there. it'll be a blast and a challenge, i'm sure!
cheers,
TS
How about those who are agnostic, jgnat?
--Leo (of the definitely-not-an-atheist class)
Agnostic....athiest....isn't it the same thing? If I invite agnostics, would that make it a three-way?
Well, you are showing your true colors now, aren't you Jgnat?
>Well, with this comment and a PM I received, I now realize I am debating with an idiot of collossal proportion.
Rhetoric instead of substance. You have done nothing but dodge the original questions and scripture in the initial post. BTW, the PM was an appeal to your reasoning.
>I am NOT pro-abortion. I am anti-bombers.
You compared the bombing of one abortion clinic to the continual terrorist bombings coming from Islam. I wonder how you will feel when Ottowa is the target instead of New York, London and Washington? OH, sorry, there is little chance of that since the Canadian government has been taken over by knee-jerk libs who sympathize with those who would damage the U.S. in any way possible. (Hey, can I use rhetoric also?)
>Oh Shining One, you HAVE elevated the bible to God-head, as you have consistently accused me of being godless for refusing to bow down to your god.
Where do we learn about God and if the Bible is it then how can you selectively ignore the commands therein? How can you 'pick and choose', ignore context and side with Bible-bashers?
>Yet you admit to elevating some scriptures above others based on context and history. You choose to believe some parts of the Bible. The Christ that you follow is one of your own making. Hypocrite!
Oh, will you quit with the grandstanding? You've shown your own ignorance on scripture interpretation, well, its either ignorance or denial. The only thing consistent about you is your inconsistency!
>It's no fun shooting fish in a barrel.
Translation of Jgnat's last comment: I can't win on merit of argument, therefore I will 'play to the allies I have here, so they will keep cheering me on'. Go ahead, try and actually stand up for your faith and see how quickly the mob will turn on you. The fact that they chime in contiually in support of you shows their own intellectual dishonesty. (More rhetoric for the mob!)
Rex
Hi REX,
I hope your doing well. Your replied to jgnat : Where do we learn about God and if the Bible is it then how can you selectively ignore the commands therein? How can you 'pick and choose', ignore context and side with Bible-bashers?
I'll have to say you sound like my mother. No offense here, I think she's great, but she is a hard line JDub who always accused any other Christian religion as pickers and choosers. This is a problem in any system that will not consider the possiblity that words written on a piece of paper could be typo's. I have dyslexia, and I make a lot of mistakes typing. Mostly spelling, and some contextual. I'm not going to spell check this post, so I'm sure there are going to be a few.
To explain my resoning I am going to take your reply itself. Please do not take this as an attack on your charactor through typing mistakes, it's purely a demonstration. You first sentance, a question, is missing vital punctuation to convay your message explicitly.
Where do we learn about God and if the Bible is it then how can you selectively ignore the commands therein?
Do you mean:
Where do we learn about God and if the Bible is it, then, how can you selectively ignore the commands therein?
Or did you mean:
Where do we learn about God, and if the Bible is it, then how can you selectively ignore the commands therein?
Or did you mean:
Where do we learn about God and if the Bible is it then how, can you selectively ignore the commands therein?
Or did you mean:
Where do we learn about God, and if the Bible is it then how can you selectively ignore the commands, therein...?
You have actualy written a question which, as far as I understand it, explain jgnats stance. When the writers and copyists wrote the scriptures, there were no punctuation marks as applied in English. In fact, we only have translations, based on translations, of copies, of the original texts. With two thousand years of hand me downs and political influences, any neutral observer could easily see that what we have today is, at best, a resonable idea of those orginial words and meanings. With that, my understanding of Christians who believe in their relationship with their Christ as the only important message from the bible stands. As this is a theme of the new testiment.
steve
Hi Steven,
The simple fact of the matter is this: with modern methods of research and comparisons of manuscript evidence we can know almost exactly what was taught by the apostles, which speaks to the actual teaching of Christ. Please go beyond the 'Jesus Seminar' fringe group of scholars if you want to see exactly what I mean....
http://www.carm.org/
Start here, my friend. For one to base their beliefs almost entirely upon what they 'feel' is the truth of the matter, makes one susceptible to fringe group teachings. Fringe group teachings are unreliable and heretical. Remember, Christianity developed apologetics as the heresies came along. The writings of all of the apostles developed as responses to heresies. The New Testament is a compilation of texts that clarify Old Testament teachings with the life of Christ! The incarnation of the God/man (hence 'Son of man') was the realization of the Old Testament messianic prophecies in Jesus Christ. The great majority of texts and possibly all writings in the N.T. were actually written within one to four decades of the crucifixtion.
Have you noticed how none of them, not even Revelation, the gospel of John and the letters of John even mention the destruction of Jerusalem?
Rex
Me: Well, with this comment and a PM I received, I now realize I am debating with an idiot of collossal proportion.
He: Rhetoric instead of substance.
Here is the substance of how I came to my conclusion.
Oh, How I Hate Labels!
Here's an example of the danger of pegging, or labelling me. o-shining-one, you have labelled me pro-abortionist. What you could not have known is that I have friends in the pro-life movement who have determined to make a positive contribution towards pro-life. One runs a support group for teen moms. Another comiled a directory of services for new parents, and the third launched Kids Cottage, a safe house where parents can bring their children when they are at their wits' end. A highly successful venture, if I do say so.
Although Canada may appear to be a pinko haven, I live smack dab in the middle of red-neck bible-belt Alberta. We're Texans with health care. All Canadians are not cut the same. Assume nothing about me, ask!
There is only one way to understand me, or anybody for that matter, oshiningone, you have to talk to me! That takes time. And listening skills. I think I have established that oshiningone neither takes the time or interest in those you preach to to hope for any kind of meaningful discussion.
As soon as you resorted to name-calling, oshinignone, you had admitted defeat. All there is left is mop-up detail. Janitorial work is tedious. Thus, my comment that all the fun has been sucked out of this thread. I look forward to Christmas where I can enjoy a friendly tangle with some serious opponents.
Effective Debate as a Chess Game
Here in detail, oshiningone, are the ways your debating skills need work. We'll ignore the requirement for a personality transplant right now. If we were to compare a debate to a chess game, you assume on faith, oshiningone, that white always wins. This explains your overweening arrogance when you launch your first offensive. Perhaps experienced debaters have told you that white has the advantage, which is true. That advantage, however, must be carefully parlayed to obtain a win.
A. Wear your opponent's shoes. An effective debater must be able to argue both sides of an issue. By doing so, he becomes familiar with the weaknesses in BOTH arguments.
B. Consider the consequences of each move at least two or three steps in advance. "If I say this, they may respond thus or so. Do I have a defence against that?"
These two improvement, oso, will prevent you from stumbling down so many blind alleys.
C. When cornered, resist the tempation to "call on authority" (i.e. www.carm.org., or the eminent Mr. Clive Staples Lewis) Mr. Lewis is not here to defend himself, you are. Stand on your own words, make your own words count, and be prepared to defend them.
D. When cornered, never resort to name-calling. Ad-hominem arguments will demolish any fragments of respect you may have gleaned from the board. Readers will know you lost.
Premature Declaration of Victory
Your posthumous declaration of victory don't wash. You haven't "proved" a thing. I am reminded of a scripture,
"You are like children sitting in the market and shouting to each other, "We played the flute, but you would not dance! We sang a funeral song, but you would not cry." Luke 7:32 CEV
You have to establish credibility before anybody will listen to you. Credibility is gained by time, action, and listening skills. Also, there are a few other bad habits you need to overcome:
E. You deflect direct questions with a fuzzy answer. That tells me you know your so-called confidence in the WHOLE scripture is flawed. There are indeed some scriptures you "pick and chose" over others. Yet you won't admit this directly.
F. You start off aggressive, then try and undo the damage later. Too late, buddy. You want me to consider you a brother in the Lord? Your say-so doesn't mean a thing to me any more. I need to see works of kindness! For an extended period.
G. You label me, then attack the label. Who says I ascribe to the whole set of any group's beliefs? Straw man. Besides that such labelling is highly insulting. It means you take no time to really know people.
H. Research your opponent before you make assumptions about them. Based on your comments towards me, it is obvious you didn't even read my profile before you launched your attack. Other posters have mildly suggested that you may have grossly underestimated my capacity to love others. In other words, you have just blasphemed a child of God! Ooooops.
It is no fun defeating an opponent after only two moves. Now you've tossed aside the board in anger! What was your mistake? You assumed white would win. You immediately brought out your strongest piece and placed me in check. I took your Queen. You do not anticipate, or prepare, for an effective counterattack.
And finally, is it arrogant for me to interpret and debate bible concepts using my own mind? Why else did God give me my mind? To bury my talent is a grave sin. Luke 19:22-23. You may also consider that I know my bible far better than the average liberal Christian. You might want to reconsider that label as well.
I repeat my admonition I shared with you privately a few weeks ago.
- You are fighting the wrong enemy.
- If you want to be a worthy Christian apologist, get better at it!
