Profits, religion and politics

hehe, i can see you've got a bit of an aptitude for apologetics there shoeshiner!:D

still, that was a pretty weak effort really. i'm sure you can come up with something a tad better than that!

try again. if you do well, i'll serve u up some tastier ones.
 
stu,

I just read your post quoting me about my reference to harshness. You cut off the important part there. Calling someone a "pompous fool" for their beliefs is what I consider to be harsh. I don't want to point fingers directly so I said non-believers. I recognize all sides are guilty of all sins. Of course that is to the exclusion of those who feel they don't sin, or those who feel there are no sins. :) Me, I sin.

My premise has been only that each has his own truth. Which I think is your premise also. It doesn't appear that you are demanding that your truth become my truth. Nor have I demanded the same from you or anyone else. I added that those who believe in the same Truth I believe in, tend to believe with like minds about that Truth, and those who do not believe have a million reasons why not.

To me, non-believers are not of one mind, or one heart, or one motivation. Each offers his reasons for rejection. Yet believers, true believers, probably to a person, believe because their heart knows the Truth. Reasoning, logic, scientific fact, historical accuracy mean nothing to the believer because we have Faith. Our whole being knows the Truth as surely as you know you are alive.

I do ask this. If we as a people, the entire earth's population, put aside our individual pride, and sought to lead our lives in accordance with the New Testament of the Bible, would the earth be a better place to live, or worse?

And let me immediately remove from the discussion any reference to parables such as "an eye for an eye...", a common favorite answer.

Yes there are other doctrines of civil obedience. Do they proclaim "love one another as yourself?" Do they show concern for the poor, the widows and orphans? Do they teach humility and service, forgiveness and grace?

That is always the bottom line for me when the discussion turns to truth. The truth is, the New Testament asks you only to do the right thing. Be decent...that's all.

The cool thing is understanding that natural man has a difficult time being decent, and must depend on his own effort to try and maintain decency. Spiritual man has the power of the Holy Spirit to reign in our natural tendencies.... our nature. Prisons are filled with natural men, many who become spiritual men, not the other way around.

Hey, there is an interesting thought... are more violent crimes committed by Christian men or non-Christian men? More, not all. Does it mean that not being a Christian makes one more likely to commit a violent crime? I don't know. Does it mean that being a Christian makes it less likely that one will commit a violent crime? I'd bet yes.

Comin' out.... place your bets!

Edit: So far, being a religious Democrat seems to be the way to go.

:)
 


I just read your post quoting me about my reference to harshness. You cut off the important part there. Calling someone a "pompous fool" for their beliefs is what I consider to be harsh. I don't want to point fingers directly so I said non-believers. I recognize all sides are guilty of all sins. Of course that is to the exclusion of those who feel they don't sin, or those who feel there are no sins. :) Me, I sin.

it's ok with me if you wanna use my name as the one being 'harsh'. i make little secret of my contempt for organized religion.

and i'd appreciate it you wouldn't misquote me. i say a pompous fool is who claims to "i just know" something without being prepared to defend the basis on which claims to know that thing and, on top of that, tells you "and that's the end of the story".


My premise has been only that each has his own truth. Which I think is your premise also. It doesn't appear that you are demanding that your truth become my truth. Nor have I demanded the same from you or anyone else. I added that those who believe in the same Truth I believe in, tend to believe with like minds about that Truth, and those who do not believe have a million reasons why not.

your premise is faulty then, and needs to be discarded.

your 'truth' is that certain events occurred at a certain point in history.
my 'truth' is that they didn't.

how is it logically possible for BOTH of us to have a 'truth'? it's not. and it's just plain silly to talk in such terms.
we both have beliefs and if we claim that those beliefs are 'true' we need to come prepared to defend that claim.

i'm not asking for any more than that.

To me, non-believers are not of one mind, or one heart, or one motivation. Each offers his reasons for rejection. Yet believers, true believers, probably to a person, believe because their heart knows the Truth. Reasoning, logic, scientific fact, historical accuracy mean nothing to the believer because we have Faith. Our whole being knows the Truth as surely as you know you are alive.


you see, to me, that essentially says nothing at all.

you have faith in something and that's it. faith does not equal truth, no matter what your bible says!

just say "i have faith" and be done. if you want the object of your faith to be accepted as truth, you need to provide REASONS.
(hint: "i just know (in my heart)" is not rationally compelling.)

faith, as far as i can see, is simply not a valid cognitive procedure. you don't gain knowledge of anything else by simply "having faith" in it. why would anyone think that you could gain knowledge of god by simply "having faith" in him? simply does not cut it.



I do ask this. If we as a people, the entire earth's population, put aside our individual pride, and sought to lead our lives in accordance with the New Testament of the Bible, would the earth be a better place to live, or worse?

worse. definitely worse.

whatsmore, by stipulating only the new testament, you don't even seem to be aware of the requirements of this "truth" you subscribe to.

let me remind you of Matthew 5:17-18
"Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to fulfill them. 18 I assure you, until heaven and earth disappear, even the smallest detail of God's law will remain until its purpose is achieved. " (Jesus's own words)

that means we'd have to abide by such old testament favorites such as Deuteronomy. (check it out, some real zingers in there!)

so, unless some of us think that killing our wives if they weren't virgins when we married them is a good idea, i'd have to say we'd be quite bit worse off.


And let me immediately remove from the discussion any reference to parables such as "an eye for an eye...", a common favorite answer.

Yes there are other doctrines of civil obedience. Do they proclaim "love one another as yourself?" Do they show concern for the poor, the widows and orphans? Do they teach humility and service, forgiveness and grace?

That is always the bottom line for me when the discussion turns to truth. The truth is, the New Testament asks you only to do the right thing. Be decent...that's all.

see, that's just typical 'new age', palatable christian rubbish that has nothing to do with the doctrines espoused in the bible.
it doesn't cut it with me. who the hell are you to decide what is and isn't christianity?


Hey, there is an interesting thought... are more violent crimes committed by Christian men or non-Christian men? More, not all. Does it mean that not being a Christian makes one more likely to commit a violent crime? I don't know. Does it mean that being a Christian makes it less likely that one will commit a violent crime? I'd bet yes.



well, if you look throughout history, there is no doubt whatsoever that the vast majority of attrocities were committed by Christians.

but in today's society, i'd have to agree that a committed, practising christian is less likely to commit violent crimes. unfortunately, that doesn't say anything at all about the truth of christianity, which is the point under discussion.
 
So whose truth is the truth daniel? That will never be decided here because the very Truth I and a whole lot of people know to to be true, is not what you know to be true.

I agree that there is only one truth. The question is... is it the truth you espouse, or the truth I espouse? I know that my Truth is the truth. You know that your truth is the truth.

I don't see why you are having such a difficult time with the concept that each person has his own truth, when clearly the truth to you and the truth to me are different. It is as simple as that. Again, I agree, there is only one truth. You are clear on that point, so am I. We disagree on what that truth is. So while there is only one real truth, in practice there are at least two because the truth to you is not the truth to me. That's fairly simple.

Somewhere daniel your teaching went awry. The things you pull out in defense of your views are not consistent with the purpose of Jesus Christ. It is true that Jesus did not come to abolish the old law. This is what the people of the time were thinking. They also had expected a great messiah who would lead them from the oppression of the Roman military. He did not do that either. The one and only thing Jesus was sent here to do was shed his blood for our sins, in the same way that blood throughout the Old Testament was a means of atonement before God, as set forth by God.

That's it. Nothing else. No more. Presuming a verse that says Jesus did not come to abolish such and such means that you should continue to do such and such is false logic. Jesus, God in man form, came to atone for the sins of the world by shedding his blood. Along the way He set a Godly example.

How you can say to live as the New Testament would have you live would be worse is beyond me. Well for you, who seems to enjoy posting ridicule all over this website it would mean you couldn't do that anymore, so that would be worse for you. Your posts are so filled with sarcasm and anger and anything but uplifting remarks I have always been astounded where such feelings come from so consistently.

About misquoting you, here is your quote from my page 17 copied and pasted right here: "mattjclark, i don't know why you waste time with pompous fools that proclaim, "i read the word and i knew it was true. end of story"! (which is funny, cos after reading the very same, i KNEW it was a complete load of hogwash.) And here is my quote " I heard the Word, knew it was true, end of story for me." You don't have to say "ooops" daniel, it's right here and we see who misquoted whom. You omitted a very important part of my quote to strengthen your argument. Tsk tsk, not good daniel.

And please forgive me because I failed to see that your quote above meant this: "and i'd appreciate it you wouldn't misquote me. i say a pompous fool is who claims to "i just know" something without being prepared to defend the basis on which claims to know that thing and, on top of that, tells you "and that's the end of the story". I have to admit I didn't get that from your first quote above. I wonder if anyone else did.
 
Remember, dear brothers and sisters, that few of you were wise in the world's eyes, or powerful, or wealthy when God called you. Instead, God deliberately chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise.
No one can know what anyone else is really thinking except that person alone, and no one can know God's thoughts except God's own Spirit. And God has actually given us His spirit so we can know the wonderful things God has freely given us. When we tell you this, we do not use words of human wisdom. We speak words given to us by the Spirit, using the Spirit's words to explain spiritual truths. But people who aren't Christians can't understand these truths from God's Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them because only those who have the Spirit can understand what the Spirit means. We who have the Spirit understand these things, but others can't understand us at all. How could they? For, "Who can know what the Lord is thinking? Who can give Him counsel?" But we can understand these things, for we have the mind of Christ.
 
Quote from Doubter:

Remember, dear brothers and sisters, that few of you were wise in the world's eyes, or powerful, or wealthy when God called you. Instead, God deliberately chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise.
No one can know what anyone else is really thinking except that person alone, and no one can know God's thoughts except God's own Spirit. And God has actually given us His spirit so we can know the wonderful things God has freely given us. When we tell you this, we do not use words of human wisdom. We speak words given to us by the Spirit, using the Spirit's words to explain spiritual truths. But people who aren't Christians can't understand these truths from God's Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them because only those who have the Spirit can understand what the Spirit means. We who have the Spirit understand these things, but others can't understand us at all. How could they? For, "Who can know what the Lord is thinking? Who can give Him counsel?" But we can understand these things, for we have the mind of Christ.
More...


OK Doubter, that's great

I suppose Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Marshal Applegate were quoting some of those same verses to their followers who were led to an early grave (some with less parts than they began this world with).

What separates your rhetoric from those guys?

And know this above all else. I will not chop my nuts off for you (no matter how good your argument is).
 
Quote from inandlong:

So whose truth is the truth daniel? That will never be decided here because the very Truth I and a whole lot of people know to to be true, is not what you know to be true.

it's not a matter of 'whose', it's a matter of 'what'.


I agree that there is only one truth. The question is... is it the truth you espouse, or the truth I espouse? I know that my Truth is the truth. You know that your truth is the truth.

you see, WHY in the world should i BELIEVE that you have a 'truth' when you totally refuse to defend that claim?
hell, you even refuse to defend the viability of the METHOD you used to arrive at that truth.

I don't see why you are having such a difficult time with the concept that each person has his own truth, when clearly the truth to you and the truth to me are different.

i have trouble with it, because that's not the way truth works.

what is actually, really TRUE is true for all.

2+2 = 4 is TRUE for all. GRAVITY is true for all. 'pleasure is better than pain' is true for all. etc..
get the picture?

now, it is true that you and i (and everyone) BELIEVE certain things, but whether those beliefs are TRUE is what is at question, and needs to be argued for, not merely asserted. the TRUTH of those beliefs is currently in doubt, you see. while you BELIEVE you have the TRUTH, it will be you ability to DEMONSTRATE it that will determine whether or not you belief is TRUE.

now, there's some beliefs we may never know the 'truth' of, so we have to rely on what is REASONABLE. that requires arguments to be made for a case. there's no escaping this basic requirement.

personally, i can't believe that YOU don't seem to understand such a simple concept.


It is as simple as that. Again, I agree, there is only one truth. You are clear on that point, so am I. We disagree on what that truth is. So while there is only one real truth, in practice there are at least two because the truth to you is not the truth to me. That's fairly simple.

no, there aren't two truths, neither in theory nor in practise.

if our two beliefs conflict, only one is actually true.

how do we determine which is which? see above.


Somewhere daniel your teaching went awry. The things you pull out in defense of your views are not consistent with the purpose of Jesus Christ. It is true that Jesus did not come to abolish the old law. This is what the people of the time were thinking. They also had expected a great messiah who would lead them from the oppression of the Roman military. He did not do that either. The one and only thing Jesus was sent here to do was shed his blood for our sins, in the same way that blood throughout the Old Testament was a means of atonement before God, as set forth by God.

settle down inandlong. i can assure you that what i said merely a small portion of my entire argument against christianity.

That's it. Nothing else. No more. Presuming a verse that says Jesus did not come to abolish such and such means that you should continue to do such and such is false logic. Jesus, God in man form, came to atone for the sins of the world by shedding his blood. Along the way He set a Godly example.

what a typical christian response. anything you dont' like, no matter how reasonable, gets explained away by nonsense such as 'false logic'.
don't worry. i won't pursue it further. debating christianity is practially a second job for me, so i'm well aware that no matter how rationally compelling i can make an argument, i'm yet to find one christian emotionally mature enough to acknowledge it, and thus abandon, or at least seriously doubt, their faith.

just for your own understanding, how in the world can you claim to know which parts of the Word are to be followed and which aren't? that is just completely arbitrary! as i asked you, who the hell are YOU to determine what counts as Christianity?
More...
 
I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize this message as the very power of God. As the Scriptures say, "I will destroy human wisdom and discard their most brilliant ideas." So where does this leave the philosophers, the scholars, and the world's brilliant debaters? God has made them all look foolish and has shown their wisdom to be useless nonsense. Since God in his wisdom saw to it that the world would never find Him through human wisdom, he has used our foolish preaching to save all who believe.:)
 
Quote from Doubter:

So where does this leave the philosophers, the scholars, and the world's brilliant debaters? God has made them all look foolish and has shown their wisdom to be useless nonsense.
More...

well, i'm pretty sure that if i made a tally of how many times we've made each other appear foolish, i reckon it'd be something like daniel_m 639, God 3 (yeah, i've made some errors with some of my arguments)

of course, god may still get the last laugh and i'll be paying dearly in hell.... (not exactly the kind of thing you'd expect from an omnibenevolent being....but oh well, i'll take my chances...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top