Heath stop preaching already

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Heath
To start with, this was my first post to this study group, before I
realized any quoting of the Bible was considered "preaching".  So, consider
the above answer for the believers on this list.  And again to all
believers, I urge you all to read the Bible yourself and see what
understanding Jesus gives you.  That is what I meant by "chew on this".  If
we Christians don't read the Bible and follow It's teachings, we can easily
stray down the wrong path.

POOBAH
It's not the quoting of the Bible that's the problem, Heath, it's your
assumption that quoting scripture solves a problem. It's the logical fallacy
of appeal to authority. A further problem is your preaching, which is
exactly what you are doing above.

What we're interested in discussing here are the logical & historical
problems with the Bible in general, and inerrant interpretations in
particular. So, do you have anything to add on this score?

HEATH
For a non-believer or humanist, this would be akin to a person like Charles
Manson, who has absolutely no thought for his fellow man and will
use/abuse/kill/steal from/etc.. for his own ends.  One who doesn't believe
in God or Jesus would often say he was soul-less and hence "spiritually
dead".

POOBAH
So you apologize for comparing skeptics to swine, but comparing them to
Charles Manson is all right, is that it? (Shaking head in disgust) So what
do you think Heath, do you suppose there are more "spiritually alive"
criminals, or "spiritually dead" ones? If your theory is correct, we should
find that a majority of the criminals in US prisons would be atheists &
non-believers (or at least that they would be represented in greater
proportions than in the population at large). Guess what. Studies show quite
the opposite. It's us "spiritually dead" that are leading quiet, upstanding
lives, while you Christers are out murdering, stealing et. al. out of all
proportions of your numbers.

So forgive me for saying you haven't proven your point.

HEATH
Believers and non-believers would simply disagree at where this line was
crossed.  To a Christian, someone like Bill Clinton might fit the
definition because of his constant lying and sins (sins by our standards).
To a non-believer he may is not "spiritually dead" because of his humanist
policies toward welfare etc...

POOBAH
I'm not sure I entirely understand that first sentence, but I have a
question related to the topic for you Heath:

Do you still sin? If so, since I assume you consider yourself spiritually
alive, how do you know that Clinton is spiritually dead?


|f you don't, I'm afraid you may get slapped upside the head with some Bible

verses showing how wrong you are.

HEATH
We may not be able to see the wind, yet we all know what it does and can
describe it.  It is much the same with a soul.  The definitions simply
change between belief systems.  Many primitive cultures saw the wind as
demons, others (like ours) see it as simply a weather condition brought
about by differences in atmospheric pressure zones.  Any culture makes up
definitions that fit with their understanding and belief systems.  The best
we can do is explain the context to hopefully understand why something is
defined as it is.

POOBAH
False analogy. Wind can be experienced by anyone even if it cannot be seen,
there are scientific theories which explain its existence, and it can be
measured by instruments. Care to tell us how your soul can be experienced &
measured? What are observable traits that would allow us to distinguish
between the spiritually living & dead, keeping in mind that we are told in
the Bible that only God can see into a man's heart?

HEATH
To dismiss it as "an easy answer" without trying to understand the context
is more of "and easy answer".

POOBAH
No, to dismiss it as a cheap Christian rationalization is the most likely
explanation given the lack of evidence.

B.

• Previous message: Heath stop preaching already
• Next message: Heath stop preaching already
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]