Michael Hardner Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 What do you mean, "popular use?" The use of the term that is most popular, as in used by most people So far, you're the first one that I know of who said that he is a "christian".... yet he doesn't believe in the divinity of Christ and all the supernatural happenings in the New Testament - which of course includes the Resurrection! I didn't talk about me, I don't think. Can you please stop making this discussion about ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 What is a Christian? I would venture to guess someone who wouldn't even think of putting explosives into his underwear or shoes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 (edited) The use of the term that is most popular, as in used by most people Popular usage by people - even though they've sinned - who believe the divinity of Christ! In your own words from your topic, Bill Maher Nails It: I'm afraid that your definition is lacking. Someone has to follow the philosophy and words of Jesus himself to be a Christian. Yes, they can sin, but they must follow him. To me, that is the definition of a Christian - one who follows Jesus. HAS to follow. Philosophy AND words! Quite clear, isn't it? You didn't just say philosophy. You said, philosophy and words! Here are just a few of His philosophy, AND His words! Actually, most of His teachings speak of God, spiritual salvation, Kingdom in Heaven...all supernatural. (Matthew 26:63-64) Then the high priest said to him, “I demand in the name of the living God—tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” Jesus replied, “You have said it. And in the future you will see the Son of Man seated in the place of power at God’s right hand and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Matthew 22:36-40 “Teacher, which is the most important commandment in the law of Moses?” Jesus replied, “‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. A second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.” Matthew 5:43-47 “You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor’ and hate your enemy. But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you! In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much. If you are kind only to your friends, how are you different from anyone else? Mark 8:34-38 Then, calling the crowd to join his disciples, he said, “If any of you wants to be my follower, you must turn from your selfish ways, take up your cross, and follow me. If you try to hang on to your life, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for my sake and for the sake of the Good News, you will save it. And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul? Is anything worth more than your soul? If anyone is ashamed of me and my message in these adulterous and sinful days, the Son of Man will be ashamed of that person when he returns in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” John 18:36 “My Kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. If it were, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish leaders. But my Kingdom is not of this world.” Matt 23:37-39 37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’[c]” John 14:1 "Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. Well, as I've said....practically in all His teachings He either directly or indirectly speak about God, divinity, heaven, spiritual salvation, eternal life! So to eliminate any of His teachings that has something to do with the "supernatural".....you're left with hardly anything at all! What's so special that is left? Our societal laws cover the basic - murder, stealing, assault, bearing false witness (perjury). And if you change His message, it's no longer His philosophy at all! I didn't talk about me, I don't think. Can you please stop making this discussion about ourselves. But you did say that, if I'm not mistaken....in one of the topics. Have I misunderstood you? In your own words, from that topic, Bill Maher..." You and Michael can correct me if I'm wrong, but I had thought he was a Christian, and you were not? I do consider myself a Christian, though others may disagree. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18944&st=30 Edited August 20, 2011 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 (edited) No, because the argument is about your claim to "know" that the Bible is "true." It is an epistemological argument based on the premise that you are assigning your internal perceptions as objectively, or externally, true. It doesn't matter so much what you think about the Bible as being true, but your ability to present internal information - on any subject - in an objective frame of reference that is coherent externally. We're talking about "CHRISTIANS." A religious group! Whose book is the Bible! So if you're going to split hair whether the Bible is true or not, then go to the topic nextdoor - THE BIBLE. I've listed facts that show science supports the Bible. Yes, for non-believers, I have to show proof since of course, you wouldn't just take my word for it when I say the Bible is true! This is bound to fail because no one will dispute that the Bible cannot contain facts or some factual data. But stating that the Bible is "true" by citing a few bits and pieces of factual information makes no sense whatsoever. This would be like saying the ocean is actually 5 inches deep by an examination of a few tidal pools here and there. You gotta be kidding me. Either you don't fully grasp the full scale implication of what a "few scientific datas that are contained in the Bible" signify......or you're just winging it! You havene't really followed that topic. Go back and do a little homework. You're just regurgitating the same old same old. That's already been argued and rebutted for the umpteenth times in that topic. If you want to use "scientific proofs" that the Bible is "true" then I think it incumbent on you to provide enough facts to exceed a statistical threshold of probability. In other words, you would have to show that the Bible consists of a bare minimum of 50% factual information to even be considered. Baloney! You can't even give a rebutt to the articles that gunned down your evolution? Even Dawkins couldn't even defend his own bold assertion in the God Delusion - he's more busy playing hide-and-seek with William Craig - and you're saying it's incumbent upon me - who'd already given facts with credible references/sources - to give more??? That's rich! And what about you? What have you given so far other than pure spit? See here is an keen example of your problem. You have formulated that I am a part of some social group ("the rest of you new atheists") when in fact, you have no "true" idea whether I am or not. Instead, you have taken this formulation, which is an internal mental construct of yours, and assigned it as "true" externally. Internally....externally....never mind the waltzing around. Let's get straight to the point. There was no mystery! You practically displayed it for all to see! What do you think is the New Atheist? Oh but it does, I have just proven it in the previous statement. One of the mopst vexing problems of hypochondria is that hypochondriacs are the first to admit they are not hypochondriacs. And until they get honest enough to be able to take a look at themselves in an external, objective way, they are stuck in that self-fulfilling, looping, mental construct. In a larger sense, this is a similar internal mechanism of circular reference that afflicts plenty of other types of mentally ill people, most notably schizophrenics. Focus. Before you know it, you'll be bringing up Freud and Dr Phil! Edited August 20, 2011 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 See here is an keen example of your problem. You have formulated that I am a part of some social group ("the rest of you new atheists") Oh, the irony is just so deliciously wicked! I can't help but compare you and MHardner. MHardner - who doesn't believe in the supernatural - claimed in a previous post that he is a "christian" but he doesn't believe in the number one tenet of Christianity, and the main message of Christ. Some of us are saying...no, no, no you don't belong in that group! And you, you've been displaying the characteristic of the new atheist for quite sometime now. And you didn't even know that you belong in that group! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 I would venture to guess someone who wouldn't even think of putting explosives into his underwear or shoes. There's no room next to the rifles they're sneaking into children's campgrounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 So to eliminate any of His teachings that has something to do with the "supernatural".....you're left with hardly anything at all! What's so special that is left? Our societal laws cover the basic - murder, stealing, assault, bearing false witness (perjury). No our societal laws are a reflection of morality and what we believe is right or wrong. The character Jesus in the bible reinforces these various values, and the divinity stuff provides a carrot and stick mechanism to underpin this set of directives - the fear of god and hell, and the promise of eternal life. Clearly the roman aristocrats that most likely wrote the bible, and the government that forced Rome to convert to Christianity understood what would pull peoples strings. It was a brilliant work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 There's no room next to the rifles they're sneaking into children's campgrounds. That's very positive. Scout leaders here bring 12 Ga. shotgun to children's campground. And they carry it loaded when child has to go to outhouse at night. Thanks to Ontario government we have blackbears coming out of our ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 That's very positive. Scout leaders here bring 12 Ga. shotgun to children's campground. And they carry it loaded when child has to go to outhouse at night. Thanks to Ontario government we have blackbears coming out of our ears. In Norway, the Christians just kill the children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 Popular usage by people - even though they've sinned - who believe the divinity of Christ! In your own words from your topic, Bill Maher Nails It: That's Bill Maher's definition. Everyone has their own definition. In your own words, from that topic, Bill Maher..." http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18944&st=30 Ok, you caught me, but in THIS discussion, this thread, I have tried to talk abstractly about the meaning of the word Christian as per the OP. To me, it's someone who lives the teachings, regardless of their metaphysical inclinations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 Jesus is the base of the Christianity - The bible is not - and only part of the new testiment relates to Christ - and parts of the old testitment are theoretical in their relativness to Christ - All I know is that there are only about 3 paragraphs in the New Testitment that are of any use...any person that calls themselves a Christian and starts to quote old testimonial writings is a Jew and not a Christian....Jesus broke with tradtion and only took along what was useful and good that was tradtional - the rest he dumped - but that takes some intelligent consideration in order to know what is garbage and what is wise to keep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 We're talking about "CHRISTIANS." A religious group! Whose book is the Bible! Yes, based on a faithful interpretation of a book. So if you're going to split hair whether the Bible is true or not, then go to the topic nextdoor - THE BIBLE. I've listed facts that show science supports the Bible. Yes, for non-believers, I have to show proof since of course, you wouldn't just take my word for it when I say the Bible is true! The issue is not with the Bible, so there is no hair splitting here. I am not questioning your ability to prove to yourself (internal) that the Bible is true, but the nature of the information you advance to others (external) in support of your "proof" of anything. You gotta be kidding me. Either you don't fully grasp the full scale implication of what a "few scientific datas that are contained in the Bible" signify......or you're just winging it! You havene't really followed that topic. Go back and do a little homework. You're just regurgitating the same old same old. That's already been argued and rebutted for the umpteenth times in that topic. Again, with the hypochondria. I don't see any great proclamation about the validity of anything you have presented to the skeptics. Nothing. Nor do I see any great change in the spiritual movement of the masses and - one would think - there would be with the universal truth being presented. Yet, nothing. Status quo. That external reaction to objective information should tell you something. So far, any reaction, if that has actually been any at all, is wholly underwhelming. Either you don't grasp the full scale implication of not being able to be convincing or you are regurgitating the same old. Did you know that persistant hypochondriacs frequently switch doctors? Do you know why they do? Baloney! You can't even give a rebutt to the articles that gunned down your evolution? It isn't "my" evolution so there is no need to rebutt. However, I am easily rebutting your contention that you can possibly "know" that the Bible is "true." It is quite easy and has been successfully used since, well, Martin Luther. Even Dawkins couldn't even defend his own bold assertion in the God Delusion - he's more busy playing hide-and-seek with William Craig - and you're saying it's incumbent upon me - who'd already given facts with credible references/sources - to give more??? That's rich! The only thing I see you defending is your form of spiritual hypochondria, but you are neither convincing of your defence of it or the articles of your interest. This, I believe, is due to the nature of the information you present, the epistemological argument. You've convinced yourself which is the limit of your ability. And what about you? What have you given so far other than pure spit? I have given you food for thought, but all you can focus on is some imaginary attack on your hypochondria, thus you need to defend it's validity at the expense of any possible insight available to you. It appears to me you have far more room for fear than room for faith. Internally....externally....never mind the waltzing around. Let's get straight to the point. There was no mystery! You practically displayed it for all to see! No, not at all. Even the skeptical followers of Jesus Christ asked for proof of his assertions and, as the story goes, he gave it to them. And he didn't have to rely on Roman soothsayers to do it. In that regard, despite your assertion that you do, you are not much of a "follower" of Jesus Christ since you are unwilling to even walk the walk. What do you think is the New Atheist? The New Atheist is a person who pretends they are a true follower, like a hypochondriac who pretends they have an illness. Other than a methods to get attention in social groups, it is essentially meaningless. Focus. Before you know it, you'll be bringing up Freud and Dr Phil! No, hypochondria was a phenomenon known long before Freud or Dr. Phil. You should know this already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 Oh, the irony is just so deliciously wicked! I can't help but compare you and MHardner. MHardner - who doesn't believe in the supernatural - claimed in a previous post that he is a "christian" but he doesn't believe in the number one tenet of Christianity, and the main message of Christ. Some of us are saying...no, no, no you don't belong in that group! And you, you've been displaying the characteristic of the new atheist for quite sometime now. And you didn't even know that you belong in that group! The real irony is that there is more Christian value in a single one of his humble admissions than in all of your vehement defences of your rich little mental structures. I get a sense that he walks his convictions while I sense you are still trying to talk your way out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted August 20, 2011 Report Share Posted August 20, 2011 A Christain is a person who stands up to the state and says - You are not the boss of me - I am King - every person is a KING and a QUEEN...every child is royal! This Christian is willing to give up their life to over throw the state when the state is an obstructive and oppressive thing - Show me one Christain that is willing to die for freedom - freedom for all....I don't see anyone willing to chance it....do you ? So in truth there are no Christains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 spiritual hypochondria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukin Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 spiritual hypochondria Who's invading your nightmare? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 Who's invading your nightmare? Once my dream ends you all disappear. How do you spell narcistic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 Ok, you caught me, but in THIS discussion, this thread, I have tried to talk abstractly about the meaning of the word Christian as per the OP. To me, it's someone who lives the teachings, regardless of their metaphysical inclinations. But ultimately - and re-read the proceeding responses you gave after the OP - it is your own views that comes through. Because your views are compatible - if not the actual example - with the abstract definition you are proposing. First of all, it's not a popular usage the way you "abstractly" try to define what is a Christian. Second, being an "abstractly"-defined "christian" yourself, of course, you ultimately reflect on your own philosophy. There's no one else on this thread aside from you who defines it "abstractly" like you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 The real irony is that there is more Christian value in a single one of his humble admissions than in all of your vehement defences of your rich little mental structures. I get a sense that he walks his convictions while I sense you are still trying to talk your way out. What do you know about Christian values? You don't even know your own group! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 In Norway, the Christians just kill the children. And they eat babies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 "The Repetitive Atheist" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 What do you know about Christian values? You don't even know your own group! Again with the irony. What do YOU know about Christian values? That is the point isn't it - your ability to "know" anything outside of the mental structures you have created to substantiate a delusional sense of superior knowledge. You don't even know your "own group" and, furthermore, cannot engage in any sort of meaningful discussion in which the nature of those internal truisms can be honestly examined in the open. All you appear to be able to do is parrot. But despite the parrot's best effort at repeating The Word, it still doesn't know what The Word actually means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 Again with the irony. What do YOU know about Christian values? That is the point isn't it - your ability to "know" anything outside of the mental structures you have created to substantiate a delusional sense of superior knowledge. You don't even know your "own group" and, furthermore, cannot engage in any sort of meaningful discussion in which the nature of those internal truisms can be honestly examined in the open. All you appear to be able to do is parrot. But despite the parrot's best effort at repeating The Word, it still doesn't know what The Word actually means. Except that the parrot doesn't claim he knows what the Word means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiddleClassCentrist Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 Christian - An irritional individual with an uncanny desperate will to appear morally superior. Often someone who warps the teachings of christ to rationalize every decision they make including theft, manipulation, violence and even hate crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted August 21, 2011 Report Share Posted August 21, 2011 I can't help but compare you and MHardner. MHardner - who doesn't believe in the supernatural - claimed in a previous post that he is a "christian" but he doesn't believe in the number one tenet of Christianity, and the main message of Christ. Some of us are saying...no, no, no you don't belong in that group! I have asked you repeatedly to not make this about you and me, and you still refuse. Your opinion on the number one tenet of Christianity is just that - an opinion. I ask you again: let's argue about this objectively and not personally. I do not want this to descend into a pit of personal insults. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and it should be respected whether one believes in the logic behind it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.