Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   CrashFrog vs. Juhrahnimo: A friendly discussion
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 136 of 164 (178909)
01-20-2005 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Juhrahnimo
01-20-2005 11:12 AM


So, define what "act" is and what you would expect to experience if God "acted".
I think I did already. Look, if you can't imagine what it would be like if gods took an active role in the physical world, then there's nothing I can do to help you overcome this deficiency in your imagination.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 11:12 AM Juhrahnimo has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4128 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 137 of 164 (178910)
01-20-2005 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by crashfrog
01-20-2005 11:27 AM


quote:
I currently have in my library more books on apologetics... I'm trying to keep it at a layman's level... I'm debating on an entirely different level here...
I don't see this in that post crash? was it deleted?
J - if you said this, then I forget "layman's level" it's weak stuff. You might want to present your better material as what you've said so far has been heard 100 times before.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2005 11:27 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2005 11:42 AM CK has not replied
 Message 144 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 12:49 PM CK has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 138 of 164 (178912)
01-20-2005 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by CK
01-20-2005 11:32 AM


I don't see this in that post crash? was it deleted?
Yeah I guess it's the bits he deleted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by CK, posted 01-20-2005 11:32 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 12:13 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2303 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 139 of 164 (178918)
01-20-2005 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 127 by Juhrahnimo
01-20-2005 10:25 AM


Just a nitpick....
But I'm not talking about brainwashed people. I'm talking about the FOUNDERS of a faith.
Marshall Applewhite, founder of Heaven's Gate WAS one of the identified dead in Rancho Santa Fe.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 10:25 AM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 12:09 PM Asgara has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 164 (178919)
01-20-2005 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Asgara
01-20-2005 11:58 AM


Re: Just a nitpick.... whoops!
That was significant; I meant founders of "THE" faith, namely the one I'm talking about; Christianity. I didn't proofread. Now the question should read differently.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Asgara, posted 01-20-2005 11:58 AM Asgara has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 141 of 164 (178920)
01-20-2005 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by crashfrog
01-20-2005 11:42 AM


yes
Yes, it was part of rantings that I later deleted, although apparently before you saw it. It was too far out of bounds for this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2005 11:42 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 142 of 164 (178924)
01-20-2005 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by crashfrog
01-20-2005 11:27 AM


Yep,
Crash writes:
Oh, I get it. You're convinced you're the very definition of "spiritual maturity"...
Sorry, but no. I was merely pointing out that CK is rejecting anyone who doesn't support his view in this. Unless it's a soundbite that he can dig up from somewhere.
Crash writes:
but it doesn't apparently occur to you that you spent the first 40 posts of this thread ignoring your own topic and instead trying to defend yourself against imagined slights.
Imagined? You're tempting me again. Unlike Christ, I fall for it. So here I go; WHICH imagined slights? I was falsely accused and I pointed that out, and it was admitted by RAZD. Done as far as I'm concerned. Maybe you didn't actually read those posts.
Crash writes:
They call that "pride", you know.
Yeah, I know. Thanks again for pointing out I'm a sinner. I'm only a sinner saved by Grace. I do have a problem with pride, yes sir, and I'm working on it.
Crash writes:
We have seen the very spiritual mature; one of them posts here under the name "Truthlover."
I apologize for not measuring up to Truthlover's standards.
Crash writes:
Pride, pride, pride. I don't know why I thought I could learn anything from you.....
Crash, Crash, Crash. That's why you lost your faith. Because you looked too much to fallible PEOPLE, and they disapointed you. Instead, you should have looked to Christ; the ONLY man who was and is perfect. But you've already discredited him too, so what's the point?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2005 11:27 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2005 1:04 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 164 (178926)
01-20-2005 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Juhrahnimo
01-20-2005 12:15 AM


Re: ok,
quote:
I disagree completely. Rather [evolution] is based on the INTERPRETATION of physical evidence that exists today. But that belongs in an entirely different thread.
Well, hold on for a sec. I am not going to argue whether or not evolution is true, but rather the difference in the evidence between scientific claims and biblical claims.
Firstly, what physical evidence do I have that would lend credence to the biblical stories. What physical evidence am I able to interpret for myself. In the case of the evolution vs. creation debate, all of the physical evidence is available to both sides of the debate. From there, both sides interpret the evidence. With biblical claims the only interpretation of events that we have are the gospel writers. That's it. No matter your opinion of evolution, you have to admit that biblical claims and evolutionary claims are on different levels.
quote:
You're asking some very intelligent questions, no doubt. Since you already discount any eyewitness reports, I can't help you further on that. But to your:
I don't discount eyewitness accounts out of hand. I am discounting the gospels as eyewitness accounts because they simply can not be shown to be eyewitness accounts. For instance, none of the gospel writers were there for the birth of Christ, so the nativity stories are obviously not eyewitness accounts. Crashfrog has also outlined other evidence which demonstrates that the gospels were more than likely oral tradition. Next, we have a very biased source, a religious movement that needs to cement itself as worshiping a divine figure.
quote:
Yes... the big "IF". If some other people would have written down what happened, then I would believe (I predict you would still discredit the writings as forgeries or plain B.S.). Or, if God would show himself to me, I would believe. Or, "If Jesus would come down from the cross" they would have believed back then. I doubt it. Jesus performed many miracles, healed the sick, cleansed the lepers, the blind saw, the lame walked, fed thousands with a handful of food, even the dead were raised. And they still didn't believe because they chose not to. Even the highly esteemed Pharisees saw the miracles of Jesus, and they refused to believe.
Firstly, I never said that I would believe, only that it would lend more credence to the gospel stories. The only source for the stories found in the gospels is from the religion that depends on those stories. Even you have to admit that this is a biased source, even if the stories end up being accurate. Why don't we have stories written by the Roman soldiers who witnessed the angels? Why would the Pharisees deny a risen Messiah, a Messiah they had been waiting for for hundreds of years? Why would an educated Roman, unbiased by previous religious beliefs or by the Jesus movement, write about this supposed risen figure? I can't see why these type of people would not have written an account.
quote:
But let's not go back and forth on those items. Instead, respond to this:
We have reliable records of the early Christians being persecuted and killed. WHY do you think they were persecuted and killed? And what do you think the CHRISTIANS thought when they were giving up their lives as they were being slaughtered? Where did their belief come from?
We have early records of Muslims being persecuted, persecuted by christians nonetheless. We have Muslims crashing planes into tall buildings for their religion. How can you deny that Muhammed is the Prophet of God, and the Koran is the Word of God?
This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 01-20-2005 12:42 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 12:15 AM Juhrahnimo has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 144 of 164 (178936)
01-20-2005 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by CK
01-20-2005 11:32 AM


Well...
CK writes:
You might want to present your better material as what you've said so far has been heard 100 times before...
And that's why you will be "without excuse". Sorry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by CK, posted 01-20-2005 11:32 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by CK, posted 01-21-2005 7:55 AM Juhrahnimo has not replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 145 of 164 (178944)
01-20-2005 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Quetzal
01-20-2005 11:16 AM


Re: Where Does Matthew Get His Material?
Quetzal:
Actually, there may be places in the upper Potomac where one could toss a coin across the river. I lived on the North River, a branch of the Potomac, when we were first married, and the Cacapon River, another tributary of the Potomac in Hampshire County, W.Va, near where Washington's family had owned land used to grow hemp for ropes used to tow barges up and down the Potomac and around Great Falls.
There are many narrow gorges in the upper Potomac, so rather than totally discount the story by whether one can toss a coin across the river, I will instead stick with the argument that no one but an idiot spend-thrift would throw away a week's wages in such an frivilous way.
And now, back to the Santa biography.
Regards, Abshalom

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Quetzal, posted 01-20-2005 11:16 AM Quetzal has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 146 of 164 (178947)
01-20-2005 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Juhrahnimo
01-20-2005 12:26 PM


Instead, you should have looked to Christ; the ONLY man who was and is perfect.
If God doesn't exist, then the Christ stuff can't be true either.
I'm sure Jesus was a great guy, and I'm sure that most of what happens in the Bible didn't actually happen. There's much in that life of Christ that informs my worldview to this day; there's much in his life worth emulating, like the humble self-sacrifice of the cross.
And even better yet it doesn't have to have happened for it to be meaninful, and to be worth emulating. If these sound like contradictions to you, it's because you're not mature enough.
But you've already discredited him too, so what's the point?
As I said; the divinity of Christ relies on the existence of God. You should have started by trying to prove that God exists; but apparently you didn't fully understand my views or what atheism is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 12:26 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-21-2005 1:49 AM crashfrog has replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4678 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 147 of 164 (178950)
01-20-2005 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by Juhrahnimo
01-20-2005 10:25 AM


Re: Wrong group of people....
But the question I'm asking is: What purpose do you think these "founders" of Christianity had for promoting this supposed "lie" of Jesus rising from the grave? I'm guessing you think the disicples perhaps stole the body out of the grave, as the "elders" of the synagogue told the soldiers to report? Matt. 28:13
What purpose(s) do founders of any religion have? What purposes did the founders of Judaism, Islam, Jainism, Zorastarism, Buddhism, Taosim, etc. have?
I personally don't know the basis for the Gospels. Earl Doherty THE JESUS PUZZLE argues interestingly for Paul teaching a mythological Christ that was given an earthly existence by the Gospel writers via midrash.
My best guess is that there was probably a teacher who experienced awakening and tried to convey it to some followers but his life was cut short perhaps by crucifixion and his teachings were misunderstood and misinterpreted and then when Constantine adopted the sect as the official religion of the Roman empire there was a further revision and rewriting of the faith. A thousand years of cultural indoctrination makes for massive believability as can be exampled by many of the major world religions. Mormonism has had much less than that and yet millions find it quite believable. We are dealing with the psychological nature of human beings.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 10:25 AM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 11:42 PM lfen has replied
 Message 160 by purpledawn, posted 01-21-2005 12:37 PM lfen has replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 148 of 164 (178954)
01-20-2005 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by crashfrog
01-20-2005 11:27 AM


the frog writes:
We have seen the very spiritual mature; one of them posts here under the name "Truthlover."
Hey crash, I think you meant TrueCreation.

Proof that girls are evil.
We know that girls require time and money.
girls = time X money
We know that time is money, right?
Time = money
Girls = money2
According to a great philosopher, money is the root of all evil.
Money = Squrt(evil)
Girls = Squrt(evil)2 = evil
Therefore, we are forced to conclude that girls are evil.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2005 11:27 AM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Loudmouth, posted 01-20-2005 2:01 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 149 of 164 (178957)
01-20-2005 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by coffee_addict
01-20-2005 1:39 PM


quote:
Hey crash, I think you meant TrueCreation.
No, he means truthlover. Do a search for his posts. He used to be a regular poster when I started on this site about a year ago. He is truly a breath of fresh air and we all miss his input. TrueCreation is also great, don't get me wrong, but truthlover is more philosophical than TrueCreation. TC is the scientist of the duo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by coffee_addict, posted 01-20-2005 1:39 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 150 of 164 (178976)
01-20-2005 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Juhrahnimo
01-20-2005 11:08 AM


Re: Mismatch
From your Message 81
quote:
I was saying that we can CHOOSE to believe or CHOOSE to reject evidence or testimony....Even though we weren't there to see it, we can still believe based on eyewitness accounts or other evidence.
As I stated in Message 109
The impression I get from you is that if people don't believe, then they have chosen to reject true information, not that they have found the accounts or evidence to be untrue and have rejected false information.
Your response has proven my point. I shared with you why I feel the author of the Book of Matthew probably was not an eyewitness to the ministry of Jesus. I showed you just a few items that are troublesome and the information I found concerning those items.
My conclusion was that these few items lead me to question whether the author of Matthew was actually an eyewitness.
Read the extreme judgements you've issued.
Because I have reason to doubt an unknown author, you claim I've discredited all the disciples and God.
Because I don't agree with most apologetics and personally have found many of their conclusions inane, empty, lacking sense, silly etc., you claim I have discredited their sources.
You accuse me of not wanting to believe God's message when I've made no such statement. Discerning if an author is true or not does not detract from God's message.
Because I have chosen one quote out of an entire book, you accuse me of not reading the whole book. BTW, I have read the whole book. The fact that Strobel became a Christian wasn't relavant to my post. He made HIS choice based on what HE saw and heard. That's HIS choice. I have to make MY own choice. The quote was to show that Christian scholars agree that the authors of the gospels are technically unknown.
quote:
You discredit me because you don't think I'm "spiritually mature enough", but have you heard of ANYONE who MIGHT be mature enough to suit your requirements?
I explained that my feelings are based on your posts to date. All I know of you are your posts.
Even though I can choose to accept or reject evidence, if I reject or question evidence that you consider to be true, it bothers you.
Now do you understand why I don't want to get into this type of discussion with you? I've already read the apologetics.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 11:08 AM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-20-2005 10:57 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024