1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Is Defense of the Gospel a Legitimate Activity?

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by thomas t, Feb 23, 2021.

  1. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,709
    Ratings:
    +470
    Religion:
    Christian
    I am neutral towards what Moses said there.
    I would never tell my conversation partners that a religious authority calls them names.
    Even if one of them may have resorted to cherry picking.

    From my experience in one big Christian message board, discussions often went like that:
    Atheist " I don't believe because of x"
    Christian "y".
    Atheist refuting y...
    Christian "you are a fool, you are a [enter names here]"
    It was a shame.
     
  2. Norman Beall

    Norman Beall Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2021
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +7
    Religion:
    Lover of wisdom, Proper Atheist
    it's not name calling, it's a reflection of the truth of an individual. one that hops from truth to truth as they see fit, is called a frog in the books of moses.
     
  3. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,709
    Ratings:
    +470
    Religion:
    Christian
    I also got called names.
    Sometimes they hid their name calling in a quote.
    These were usually the reactions when I called them out:
    "it's an observation"
    "but it's true"
    "I want to help you"...
    however this did not make the name calling undone. Never.

    There are situations in which God called someone names. Never should a Christian do the same.
    This is at least my opinion.
     
  4. Norman Beall

    Norman Beall Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2021
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +7
    Religion:
    Lover of wisdom, Proper Atheist
    God is a being of knowledge. Opinions are irrelevant to him.

    God calls me the sword, the unicorn, the comforter, the holy ghost. it's not name calling, it's a relfection of the truth that is in me. God calls cherry pickers of the truth frogs. Take it up with God when you meet him in judgement. They that deal truly God finds delight in.
     
  5. Norman Beall

    Norman Beall Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2021
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +7
    Religion:
    Lover of wisdom, Proper Atheist
    That's pretty funny, you're going to tell God in judgement he can't call individuals that hop from truth to truth as they see fit that hop over other truths, he can't call them frogs. Good luck with that heh
     
  6. Norman Beall

    Norman Beall Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2021
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +7
    Religion:
    Lover of wisdom, Proper Atheist
    again, go read exodux 8 of the kjv. If you believe there are actual frogs in the story, and do not instead see it's talking about humans that cherry pick the truth as they see fit, you're a cherry picker of the truth as you see fit, one that God calls a frog.

    How do you think it will work out for you in judgement? God calls you a frog, and you deny it? think about it heh
     
  7. halbhh

    halbhh The wonder and awe of "all things".

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2019
    Messages:
    1,658
    Ratings:
    +655
    Religion:
    Rescued of Jesus the Christ
    I got that, but I know believers are often having incomplete understanding, I saw, from many thousands of conversations with at least hundreds. That a person believed didn't make them already get what they missed -- as decades pass, they learn new things.
     
  8. halbhh

    halbhh The wonder and awe of "all things".

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2019
    Messages:
    1,658
    Ratings:
    +655
    Religion:
    Rescued of Jesus the Christ
    I referred to the context of the previous post I wrote to you, to which you'd responded --
     
    #168 halbhh, Feb 27, 2021
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2021
  9. night912

    night912 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,466
    Ratings:
    +573
    Religion:
    Not religious
    Please set aside the dishonesty and address what I said instead of ignoring it so you can make a claim. If you actually read what I said, you would've realized that verse doesn't exist. So present your evidence to support that your verse exist in the manuscript of Mark that I used.

    And that verse itself contradicts verse 8

    8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

    You're making a claim based on your assumption. There's no verse in Mark that would suggest that she changed her mind. There's only a contradiction. Verses 1-8 is narrating an event. And the verses that were added later on, immediately after verse 8, it is just a rewording of the narrative of the same event and adding a couple new things that contradicts what was said. Mary said nothing to anyone, therefore, if Mary told those who were with him(Jesus), that would be a contradiction.

    So which contradiction are you going with? Mine, where Luke contradicts Mark or yours, where Mark contradicts Mark?
     
  10. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Rival's Wife

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    72,232
    Ratings:
    +28,140
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    You want more? What about ripping the unborn from the womb, killing homosexuals, killing apostates, keeping slaves, keeping sex slaves, bear maulings, drownings, killing rebellious kids, killing those who violate the sabbath, kill witches, kill women who aren't virgins on their wedding night, it has such an utter lack of respect for the autonomy of others even permanent body modifications are ok to force on others under some circumstances.
    There is nothing to support that, and the passage says specifically she was a merchant, not a church leader.
    He didn't make rules about having to do those things. He made rules and policies for churches.
    Grasping at straws isnt apologetics.
    He didn't say that. He said in church men lead, women shut up and hang their heads in humility. Women, after all, need to cover up because it's a problem with them that men don't have (interestingly, the genders roles are flipped here in Judaism).
    Except none of that is there. The Bible is not egalitarian.
     
  11. Norman Beall

    Norman Beall Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2021
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +7
    Religion:
    Lover of wisdom, Proper Atheist
    umm, the tent is the great sheet knit at four corners that forms the tetrahedron, which is the platoinic solid that represents the limits of three dimensional space. it's not actually a tent. any story that includes tents is a story about understanding dimensional analysis of the platonic solids.

    we're reading the same book, right?
     
  12. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7,899
    Ratings:
    +4,759
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    You asked if I thought apologetics was a legitimate activity.

    No, it's not. Its own rules forbid certain answers if they disagree with whichever orthodoxy is involved.

    Therefore apologetics is not about finding historical truth or examining the bible as a set of historical documents. It's about defending the client, regardless of the charge and the strength of the charge.

    Let's leave it at that.
     
    #172 blü 2, Feb 27, 2021
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2021
  13. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,709
    Ratings:
    +470
    Religion:
    Christian
    I'm not being dihonest

    I did address what you said, I did not ignore it.
    what? see below
    what?
    see verse 10, only 2 verses after your verse 8:
    She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
    Maybe, that verse doesn't exist in your Bible, though.
    See here for the versions that contain it: Mark 16:10 She went and told those who had been with Him, who were mourning and weeping.
     
  14. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,709
    Ratings:
    +470
    Religion:
    Christian
    No, I don't want to discuss more than 3 points at the same time.
    So, let's do it that way: I address your first three points. Please leave the rest to another thread.
    1) if the mother dies, it's probably best for the unborn to let it die a sudden death instead of suffering painful starvation or maybe suffocation.
    That's how I understand it at least.
    2) it's not only about homosexuality in the classic sense, as I see it. The concept of sexual orientation did not evoilve until the late 19th century, as far as I'm informed.
    Today, there are men having sex with men although they are straight.
    Maybe God wanted to address this. God maybe did not want straight men to abandon their sex with their female partners for the sake of having sex with men. Maybe.
    But since nobody would have understood the difference between gay sex and same sex sex between one gay man and one straight man... he made a one size fits all solution. This is at least how it could be, as I see it.

    She was a merchant... and became a church leader once her house was baptized.
    Her house became a church. This is at least how I see the matter.
    In my opinion, Lydia was the church leader then.
    The passage is all about Lydia. Her house was seen as an attachment, as it seems.
    In this case, when he says "I suffer not the woman"...he made the rules for his churches. The ones he addressed in his letters.
    Yes.
    That does not mean anybody in the Christian world has to follow the rules for that particular church the letter was directed to.
    No straws here.
    So, if men have all the power as you suggest they are entitled to delegate it back to the woman then.
    At 50% I suggest.
    If they can't talk at church, they can lead or whatever they want in return.
    Galatians 3:28. The church (I mean all faithful believers) is as explained by this verse.
     
Loading...