Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9094 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: d3r31nz1g3
Post Volume: Total: 901,858 Year: 12,970/6,534 Month: 253/2,210 Week: 194/390 Day: 0/50 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evangelical Support Group
Phat
Member
Posts: 16627
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 286 of 331 (901983)
11-16-2022 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 285 by ringo
11-15-2022 11:16 AM


Re: TOPIC SYNOPSIS I
Phat writes:
Kindly explain the difference between a made-up God in 2022 versus a made-up God penned by any number of Biblical writers.
ringo writes:
The difference is that the Biblical writers didn't know any better. You ought to.
Such hubris! That humans *ought* to know better than to make up a God! You will be proven wrong very shortly...likely within a year, when our entire system begins to unravel and the world is faced with everything that Matthew warned us against.
  • wars and rumors of wars. (only these wars will grow increasingly worse, as humans seek to exterminate their own from the global population in order for their particular people and culture to survive)
  • the love of many growing cold. (and this means that many Christians themselves will pick survival over sacrifice in order to attempt to preserve their lineage. The Bible also warns against this when it says "What good does it do a man to gain the world and lose his own soul"?
    ringo writes:
    The Biblical writers didn't have science to guide them. You ought to.
    "Science" is not some shamanistic ancient ritual to consult in order to form cognizant philosophical worldviews. The peanut gallery will inevitably see it that way, however. When our cush materialistic reality falls apart, you guys will blame the far right and link it with Christianity as the major global problem that, as xongsmith says, needs to become extinct. Rather, the ultra-liberals will pine for a world of universal love, acceptance, and inclusiveness which will end up being a phony counterfeit to the original ideal expressed through Jesus Christ.
    You're the one who wants to have it both ways. You piggyback on the Bible when it suits you and deny it when it doesn't suit you.
    I, on the other hand, am pretty consistent:
    1. The Bible says what it says.
    2. Much of what it says is wrong.
    |
    Again, ringo thinks that rational critically thinking secular minds have it right. Which you don't. Without acceptance of and obedience to Jesus, you will fail...along with the antichrist spirit of the secular age.
    ringo writes:
    They made up a nasty God who punished them for stepping out of line.
    Why on earth would any people make up a nasty God? It was the people themselves who were nasty...into idol worship, temple prostitution sex (as a tantric spirituality), and incest.
    You make up a white-washed God who only asks you to do what you already want to do.
    Nonsense. I worship a God who is personal and approachable...not some static character in an ancient book!
    And if YOU are going to ever mention scripture at all, you need to learn to accept it as it is.
    I don't have to *learn* anything from you. It is you who reject God and twist the meanings of an ancient book to line up with your socialist human ideal.

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 285 by ringo, posted 11-15-2022 11:16 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 287 by DrJones*, posted 11-16-2022 8:26 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
     Message 288 by ringo, posted 11-17-2022 12:17 PM Phat has replied

      
    DrJones*
    Member
    Posts: 2220
    From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Joined: 08-19-2004


    (2)
    Message 287 of 331 (902044)
    11-16-2022 8:26 PM
    Reply to: Message 286 by Phat
    11-16-2022 3:24 PM


    Re: TOPIC SYNOPSIS I
    Without acceptance of and obedience to Jesus, you will fail...along with the antichrist spirit of the secular age.
    sure Phat. *dismissive wanking motion*

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 286 by Phat, posted 11-16-2022 3:24 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 20492
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 288 of 331 (902080)
    11-17-2022 12:17 PM
    Reply to: Message 286 by Phat
    11-16-2022 3:24 PM


    Re: TOPIC SYNOPSIS I
    Phat writes:
    ringo writes:
    The difference is that the Biblical writers didn't know any better. You ought to.
    Such hubris! That humans *ought* to know better than to make up a God!
    You should learn to read. It's a useful skill.
    I didn't say anything like, "humans *ought* to know better than to make up a God". I said, "THE BIBLICAL WRITERS" didn't know any better. They didn't have science. They didn't know the real reasons for things like lightning, so they made up gods to explain them.
    You ought to know better.
    (And you should also learn what hubris means.)
    Phat writes:
    You will be proven wrong very shortly...likely within a year, when our entire system begins to unravel and the world is faced with everything that Matthew warned us against.
    Blah blah blah.... What a load of rubbish.
    Phat writes:
    wars and rumors of wars
    There have always been wars and rumors of wars. I don't have time to list the wars we've had in my own lifetime.
    The difference is that now we try to stop them.
    Phat writes:
    "Science" is not some shamanistic ancient ritual to consult in order to form cognizant philosophical worldviews.
    That's what I'm telling you. Science is NOT shamanistic, like your religion, and it SHOULD be consulted in order to form cognizant philosophical worldviews. Ever hear of a little problem called "global climate change" that science has been trying to warn us about?
    Phat writes:
    Rather, the ultra-liberals will pine for a world of universal love, acceptance, and inclusiveness which will end up being a phony counterfeit to the original ideal expressed through Jesus Christ.
    Your thought patterns are so bizarre that it's hard to believe what I'm reading. Jesus Christ DID pine for a world of universal love, acceptance, and inclusiveness. yet, you spit on Him and yearn for an ultra-Trump world of hate and lies. Don't walk around barefoot if you don't want the homeless people you step on to squish up between your toes.
    Phat writes:
    Again, ringo thinks that rational critically thinking secular minds have it right.
    So you prefer irrational, uncrtical, unthinking minds?
    Phat writes:
    Which you don't.
    And yet, you have never been able to back up that empty assertion.
    Phat writes:
    Without acceptance of and obedience to Jesus, you will fail...
    And yet, you have never been able to back up that empty assertion.
    Phat writes:
    ... along with the antichrist spirit of the secular age.
    The antichrist spirit is yours. You are the one who denies Jesus.
    Phat writes:
    Why on earth would any people make up a nasty God?
    It doesn't matter "why". They DID. Read the Old Testament.
    Phat writes:
    It was the people themselves who were nasty...
    That's what the shamans claimed. The people were nasty and the nasty god would punish them if they didn't keep the shamans supplied with barbecued oxen.
    Phat writes:
    ... into idol worship, temple prostitution sex (as a tantric spirituality), and incest.
    Horrors! Some of them might even have been Mexicans!
    I have asked you before what is so terrible about any of those things and you didn't answer. Answer now.
    Phat writes:
    ringo writes:
    You make up a white-washed God who only asks you to do what you already want to do.
    Nonsense. I worship a God who is personal and approachable...
    You're just repeating what I said. How is it nonsense when i say it?
    Phat writes:
    ... not some static character in an ancient book!
    You keep missing the point. The character in the book is the only evidence we have that Jesus ever existed. You're throwing out the only evidence we have and making up a a white-washed God who only asks you to do what you already want to do.
    Phat writes:
    a white-washed God who only asks you to do what you already want to do.
    Again, you should learn to read. It's a useful skill.
    I said, "IF you are going to ever mention scripture at all, you need to learn to accept it as it is." You can't quote the parts you like and spit on the parts you don't like. You will not get away with that. Your dishonesty will be exposed.
    Phat writes:
    It is you who reject God and twist the meanings of an ancient book to line up with your socialist human ideal.
    1. I do not reject God. I reject YOUR perverted theology. If there was a God, I would be His best buddy.
    2. I do not "twist" anything. i quote exactly what the Bible says. I try to UNtwist the mangling that your perverted theology does.
    3. You keep forgetting that socialism is a very good thing: schools, roads, etc. Don't get all of your ideas from Trump.

    Come all of you cowboys all over this land,
    I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command:
    To hold a six shooter, and never to run
    As long as there's bullets in both of your guns.
    -- Woody Guthrie

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 286 by Phat, posted 11-16-2022 3:24 PM Phat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 289 by Phat, posted 11-18-2022 9:19 AM ringo has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 16627
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 289 of 331 (902134)
    11-18-2022 9:19 AM
    Reply to: Message 288 by ringo
    11-17-2022 12:17 PM


    A word about social programs
    ringo writes:
    I didn't say anything like, "humans *ought* to know better than to make up a God". I said, "THE BIBLICAL WRITERS" didn't know any better. They didn't have science. They didn't know the real reasons for things like lightning, so they made up gods to explain them.

    You ought to know better.
    Oh ok. So in other wods, you are implying that any and all modern humans should know better. Its not enough that you personally chose not to believe in an ancient messenger as relevant but only in His message which resonated with your modern liberalism. Got it.
    Im not pro Trump, despite ringos attempts to link me with and label me as a Trump. I am also not a liberal for several reasons. I am a conservative moderate who is against the public-at-large being responsible for the huge national debt which our country carries. The liberals seem to think that they are entitled to spend whatever is necessary to help everyone...even though not everyone will end up paying it back. You people do not understand the disciplined reality of money in general. You seem to think that if the majority can agree to keep using "it" as if it is limitless, then we all ought to want to help pay the bill. Not I. The government will never find all of my money, nor will they get their hands on any of it...except perhaps through sales tax. Not even the threat of digital money (and hence digital tracking) catch me off guard. I will not be sucked into an inclusive lovey dovey agenda.
    Yes, I owe the ancient messenger all that I have. I'm just explaining to you that He is NOT the same as the government. Thus, it will be all of you who are stuck with the bill...even when the populists are in power and want to spend your precious social money to help enrich the businesses rather than the poor unwashed masses.
    Xongsmith thinks that all Republicans (and conservative Christians) are evil and should be exterminated. The problem with you people is that when you are in power, everyone's money and taxes become yours to do what you want with. There will be a revolt, however. Even now, wealthy families are buying gold and moving it to offshore vaults. They see what's coming and they want nothing to do with your Green New Bill.
    Some more info:
    quote:
    What is the offshore system?
    The offshore financial system offers privacy, which can provide an opportunity to hide assets from authorities, creditors and other claimants, as well as from public scrutiny.
    Why is it called offshore finance?
    This system is known as offshore finance because the countries that popularized this method of sheltering wealth were often in island or coastal locations, but today “offshore” signifies anywhere that is not a customer’s country of residence.
    Is this legal?
    Offshore providers are typically established according to the laws of the country where they are located. But some clients have used offshore services in ways that are not legal.

    I might add that I would never do anything illegal, and am not a wealthy man. I simply protest a digital currency system where every bit of money and financial transactions can be traced by the government.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 288 by ringo, posted 11-17-2022 12:17 PM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 290 by nwr, posted 11-18-2022 10:24 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied
     Message 291 by ringo, posted 11-18-2022 11:39 AM Phat has replied
     Message 292 by dwise1, posted 11-18-2022 2:39 PM Phat has replied

      
    nwr
    Member
    Posts: 6183
    From: Geneva, Illinois
    Joined: 08-08-2005
    Member Rating: 3.3


    (1)
    Message 290 of 331 (902135)
    11-18-2022 10:24 AM
    Reply to: Message 289 by Phat
    11-18-2022 9:19 AM


    Re: A word about social programs
    I am a conservative moderate who is against the public-at-large being responsible for the huge national debt which our country carries.
    I agree. It should be the responsibility of the rich conservatives who ran up the debt. But lots of luck collecting it from them.
    The liberals seem to think that they are entitled to spend whatever is necessary to help everyone...even though not everyone will end up paying it back.
    Oh, bullshit. It is the conservatives who run up the debt.
    The problem with you people is that when you are in power, everyone's money and taxes become yours to do what you want with.
    If you look at recent trends, the deficit goes up when Republicans are in charge and it goes down under Democratic administrations. You have it backwards.

    Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 289 by Phat, posted 11-18-2022 9:19 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 20492
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 2.2


    (2)
    Message 291 of 331 (902153)
    11-18-2022 11:39 AM
    Reply to: Message 289 by Phat
    11-18-2022 9:19 AM


    Re: A word about social programs
    Phat writes:
    Its not enough that you personally chose not to believe...
    I didn't "choose" not to believe any more than you chose not to believe in leprechauns. We both don't believe because there is no evidence. The only difference is that you have a double standard for your made-up god.
    Phat writes:
    ... in an ancient messenger as relevant...
    It isn't just ancient messengers that are irrelevant. ALL messengers are irrelevant. It's the message that matters - and you know that. You don't throw out your bills and worship the envelopes. But you have a double standard for your made-up god.
    Phat writes:
    ... but only in His message which resonated with your modern liberalism.
    And why wouldn't ancient liberalism resonate with modern liberalism? Has love changed? Have neighbors changed?
    Phat writes:
    Im not pro Trump, despite ringos attempts to link me with and label me as a Trump.
    I keep asking you and you never answer: If you don't like Trump, why do you agree with him about everything? Why do you use the same insults as he does? Answer the question.
    Phat writes:
    I am also not a liberal for several reasons.
    Ignorance? Or hate?
    Phat writes:
    The liberals seem to think that they are entitled to spend whatever is necessary to help everyone...
    Not "entitled". Required. By human decency.
    Phat writes:
    ...even though not everyone will end up paying it back.
    Where did Jesus say, "Lend to thy neighbor - but make damn sure he pays you back, even if his children die because of it"?
    Of course, it DOES get paid back. People on welfare shop at your store, don't they? The people we help don't stash all of their money away in the Cayman Islands. They spend it locally. If you'e worried about money going away and never coming back, look to the rich tax evaders (like Trump, who thinks it's "smart" to avoid taxes).
    Phat writes:
    You people do not understand the disciplined reality of money in general.
    And you don't understand the circulation of money, As the Preacher said, "Cast your bread upon the waters, for you will find it after many days." (Ecclesiastes 11:1)
    Phat writes:
    You seem to think that if the majority can agree to keep using "it" as if it is limitless...
    It IS limitless. It circulates - i.e. it moves in a circle. You give spare change to a homeless guy and he spends it on drugs and the drug dealer spends it in your store to feed his children. It's only the rich conservatives who limit it by hiding it in the Cayman Islands and stopping the circulation.
    Phat writes:
    ... we all ought to want to help pay the bill.
    You need to stop thinking of it as a "bill".
    Phat writes:
    The government will never find all of my money, nor will they get their hands on any of it...
    So you're a tax evader, like Trump.
    Phat writes:
    I will not be sucked into an inclusive lovey dovey agenda.
    So you'll never be a real Christian.
    Phat writes:
    Yes, I owe the ancient messenger all that I have. I'm just explaining to you that He is NOT the same as the government.
    You don't need to mansplain that to me. I have told you many, many, many times that it is NOT about the government at all.
    You have made up a convenient, self-serving god that you never have to give anything to, even if you claim to owe everything to him.
    Phat writes:
    The problem with you people is that when you are in power...
    I have never been in power.
    Phat writes:
    ... everyone's money and taxes become yours to do what you want with.
    To do what needs to be done.
    Phat writes:
    There will be a revolt, however. Even now, wealthy families are buying gold and moving it to offshore vaults. They see what's coming and they want nothing to do with your Green New Bill.
    I don't have a "Green New Bill" or know what one is.
    And FYI, those wealthy families are robbing YOU just like they're robbing the poor.
    Phat writes:
    What is the offshore system?
    Theft.
    Are you actually suggesting that hiding money from creditors is a good thing?
    Did you read your own quote?
    quote:
    ... some clients have used offshore services in ways that are not legal.
    Do you really think that's a good thing?
    Phat writes:
    I might add that I would never do anything illegal...
    But you support the rich doing it.
    Phat writes:
    I simply protest a digital currency system where every bit of money and financial transactions can be traced by the government.
    Your hatred of the government is noted. Maybe you have never heard the phrase, "We, the people...."
    It's sad. The US once showed such promise - but it's being taken over by a bunch of lying, thieving conservative assholes. And like the poor whites who fought to conserve slavery, you're on their side.

    Come all of you cowboys all over this land,
    I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command:
    To hold a six shooter, and never to run
    As long as there's bullets in both of your guns.
    -- Woody Guthrie

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 289 by Phat, posted 11-18-2022 9:19 AM Phat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 305 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 3:27 PM ringo has replied

      
    dwise1
    Member
    Posts: 5475
    Joined: 05-02-2006
    Member Rating: 2.8


    (4)
    Message 292 of 331 (902176)
    11-18-2022 2:39 PM
    Reply to: Message 289 by Phat
    11-18-2022 9:19 AM


    Re: A word about social programs
    Its not enough that you personally chose not to believe in an ancient messenger as relevant
    Scene in the X-Men movie in which a young mutant comes out to his parents:
    Mother: But ... can't you just choose to not be a mutant?
    Belief is not a choice. Even less so is disbelief.
    Haven't you ever read a deconversion testimonial? In many of them (eg, Dan Barker's) the individual desperately wants to hold onto his beliefs and must watch helplessly as those beliefs crumble before his eyes. Once you begin to realize that your beliefs are not true, then you lose the ability to continue to believe in them. It's not a choice ... unless you choose to engage in self-delusion, but that gets us into mental illness.
    The problem with you people is that when you are in power, everyone's money and taxes become yours to do what you want with.
    That's the Republicans you're talking about. When they commit to massive spending (eg, $2 trillion permanent tax cuts for the rich, two massive wars under Dubya), they do not bother to figure out how to pay for it. In sharp contrast as the Democrats were crafting that large relief bill for everybody (not just the hyper-rich) front and center in the discussions was how they were going to pay for it.
    It is very clear that Democrats are the fiscally responsible ones whereas it's the Republicans who are the reckless spendthrifts. History bears that over the past decades as Republicans would drive us deeper into debt and generally ruin the economy and Democrats had to then come in and clean up their mess. We lose jobs under a Republican administration and gain jobs under a Democrat. No balanced budgets under a Republican, but we did get one under a Democrat.
    And after running on inflation, what is the Republican plan for dealing with inflation? None. Instead, their Number One most important priority is investigating Hunter Biden.
    Watch their clown cars roll up into the Capitol.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 289 by Phat, posted 11-18-2022 9:19 AM Phat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 293 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 5:37 AM dwise1 has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 16627
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 293 of 331 (902207)
    11-19-2022 5:37 AM
    Reply to: Message 292 by dwise1
    11-18-2022 2:39 PM


    Two Sides To Every Argument
    dwise1 writes:
    Haven't you ever read a deconversion testimonial? In many of them (eg, Dan Barker's) the individual desperately wants to hold onto his beliefs and must watch helplessly as those beliefs crumble before his eyes. Once you begin to realize that your beliefs are not true, then you lose the ability to continue to believe in them. It's not a choice ... unless you choose to engage in self-delusion, but that gets us into mental illness.
    After you mentioned that, and recalling how I once read Dan Barkers book, I sought to google the deconversion in order to get a fresh review of the perspective.
    Instead, I found this: Dan Barkers "deconversion"
    The response was enlightening and shows me that two sides to every story exist...be it through the new atheists or through Christian apologists. I recommend you scan the reply.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 292 by dwise1, posted 11-18-2022 2:39 PM dwise1 has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 294 by Theodoric, posted 11-19-2022 10:27 AM Phat has replied
     Message 295 by ringo, posted 11-19-2022 10:51 AM Phat has replied

      
    Theodoric
    Member
    Posts: 7848
    From: Northwest, WI, USA
    Joined: 08-15-2005
    Member Rating: 2.5


    (2)
    Message 294 of 331 (902208)
    11-19-2022 10:27 AM
    Reply to: Message 293 by Phat
    11-19-2022 5:37 AM


    Re: Two Sides To Every Argument
    There is one side to Barker's story. His. Everything else is just people trying to prop up and defend their own beliefs.

    What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens

    Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

    "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

    If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 293 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 5:37 AM Phat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 297 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 12:08 PM Theodoric has replied

      
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 20492
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 295 of 331 (902209)
    11-19-2022 10:51 AM
    Reply to: Message 293 by Phat
    11-19-2022 5:37 AM


    Re: Two Sides To Every Argument
    Phat writes:
    I found this: Dan Barkers "deconversion"
    I glanced at it. It seems like typical apologetics and philosophical mumbo-jumbo - with relatively little reference to Dan Barker.
    Phat writes:
    The response was enlightening and shows me that two sides to every story exist..
    The apologetic side has always been there. It never changes and it doesn't address the rebuttals.

    Come all of you cowboys all over this land,
    I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command:
    To hold a six shooter, and never to run
    As long as there's bullets in both of your guns.
    -- Woody Guthrie

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 293 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 5:37 AM Phat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 296 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 11:57 AM ringo has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 16627
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 296 of 331 (902212)
    11-19-2022 11:57 AM
    Reply to: Message 295 by ringo
    11-19-2022 10:51 AM


    Re: Two Sides To Every Argument
    Keep in mind that the other side of this story came from dwise1. I have always respected David for his lengthy and concise posts, filled with anecdotes from his own personal life and his frustration at dealing with dishonest creationists. He puts a face on atheism/agnosticism that compels me to pay attention. It's like I could be friends with him despite our disagreements.
    ringo is different. He never agrees with any of my arguments and forces me to examine my own beliefs with a touch of humor. I doubt that he and I would be "best buddies" as he claims that he and Jesus would be if Jesus existed. If we lived in the same town, we likely would end up arguing until we couldn't stand each other...like two chess opponents meeting at the park for endless matches. I must say that he is far ahead in the series...to his credit he never leaves a post unanswered and yet he loves to defend his own deconversion and hint that I'm less of an altruistic Christian than he is an empathetic nonbeliever. Theo, however, is just plain annoying and often condescending. jar was that way also.
    ringo writes:
    The apologetic side has always been there. It never changes and it doesn't address the rebuttals.
    It addressed the issue that dwise1 initially brought up.
    I will admit that I am not unbiased in regard to this argument, though I claim that none of you are either. You want to hear deconversion stories. It reinforces your own decisions to drop the belief.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 295 by ringo, posted 11-19-2022 10:51 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 298 by ringo, posted 11-19-2022 12:11 PM Phat has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 16627
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 297 of 331 (902213)
    11-19-2022 12:08 PM
    Reply to: Message 294 by Theodoric
    11-19-2022 10:27 AM


    Re: Two Sides To Every Argument
    Theo writes:
    There is one side to Barker's story. His. Everything else is just people trying to prop up and defend their own beliefs.
    There is one side to every deconversion story. There is also another side to conversion stories and to apologetic defenses. That is what I meant.
    I read an interesting article from another source. The Deconversion Stories That Go Unnoticed The author brings up some good points.
    quote:
    What is striking to me though is that for every high-profile professed Christian that turns his back on the faith, there are 100s overseas that make the same stated professions, walk away from the faith….and it goes largely unnoticed. Christians revel in the statistics of the number of baptisms and churches planted per year overseas, but for true accuracy there should be a third and fourth category: 3. Those who turned back to their original beliefs, and 4. Churches that didn’t make it past five years. While those figures would make for poor Twitter content it would give us a more accurate picture of what exactly is happening overseas and maybe bring some much-needed scrutiny to what the Protestant missions world is doing.(...)There is an unhealthy speed in declaring someone a Christian, baptizing them, and adding them to the church. Second-century church father Justin, or as he is more commonly known today, Justin the Martyr, would press that the effectiveness of the Christian witness was only as good as how Christians themselves lived. Only those who had a proven record of living out the Christian faith were to be admitted for baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and church membership.[1] In fact, it was common in the early church to have those who professed belief to undergo discipleship and evaluation for three years before admitting them for baptism![2]The emphasis wasn’t on time “but the character only is what shall be judged”.[3] If the character wasn’t changed in a way that was evident, it was better to wait on baptism than rush it. By hurrying baptism two really bad outcomes become potential realities: an unbeliever is given false confidence that he is made right with God and unbelievers now make up part of the church. The concern wasn’t that unbelievers attend, that’s a good thing, the concern is that they are now seen as believers by other church members and the community.
    Based on the criteria of this particular author, I myself would be a poster child for a nonbeliever rather than a believer. ringo has emphasized this point repeatedly, though I think his standards for what a Christian *should be* are far too strict. In comparing today's modern "Christians" with the widow with two mites, the early believers, and certain Christian communities isolated from the rest of society, the modern believer simply does not stand up.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 294 by Theodoric, posted 11-19-2022 10:27 AM Theodoric has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 299 by ringo, posted 11-19-2022 12:18 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
     Message 302 by Theodoric, posted 11-19-2022 12:50 PM Phat has not replied

      
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 20492
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 298 of 331 (902214)
    11-19-2022 12:11 PM
    Reply to: Message 296 by Phat
    11-19-2022 11:57 AM


    Re: Two Sides To Every Argument
    Phat writes:
    If we lived in the same town, we likely would end up arguing until we couldn't stand each other...
    You wouldn't be able to run away like you do here.
    Phat writes:
    he loves to defend his own deconversion...
    When have I ever defended my "deconversion"?
    Phat writes:
    ... and hint that I'm less of an altruistic Christian....
    It's not a "hint". You are not an altruistic Christian by any stretch of the imagination. You are openly anti-Christian.
    Phat writes:
    ... than he is an empathetic nonbeliever.
    I am not an "emphatic non-believer". I drifted away from belief. It was not traumatic for me but I was definitely reluctant. I could go back easily, if there was anything to it.
    Phat writes:
    You want to hear deconversion stories.
    I couldn't care less about deconversion stories.
    Phat writes:
    It reinforces your own decisions to drop the belief.
    It wasn't a decision. It was just a gradual realization that I was free of the superstition.

    Come all of you cowboys all over this land,
    I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command:
    To hold a six shooter, and never to run
    As long as there's bullets in both of your guns.
    -- Woody Guthrie

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 296 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 11:57 AM Phat has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 301 by Theodoric, posted 11-19-2022 12:48 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

      
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 20492
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 2.2


    (1)
    Message 299 of 331 (902215)
    11-19-2022 12:18 PM
    Reply to: Message 297 by Phat
    11-19-2022 12:08 PM


    Re: Two Sides To Every Argument
    Phat writes:
    ringo has emphasized this point repeatedly, though I think his standards for what a Christian *should be* are far too strict.
    Jesus' standards, not mine.
    quote:
    Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
    Phat writes:
    In comparing today's modern "Christians" with the widow with two mites, the early believers, and certain Christian communities isolated from the rest of society, the modern believer simply does not stand up.
    So you change the standards to suit he {desired) behavior.

    Come all of you cowboys all over this land,
    I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command:
    To hold a six shooter, and never to run
    As long as there's bullets in both of your guns.
    -- Woody Guthrie

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 297 by Phat, posted 11-19-2022 12:08 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 16627
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 300 of 331 (902216)
    11-19-2022 12:33 PM
    Reply to: Message 249 by ringo
    10-22-2022 1:26 PM


    Re: Human attempts to understand God
    I was referring to the sheep and goats judgement.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 249 by ringo, posted 10-22-2022 1:26 PM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 311 by ringo, posted 11-21-2022 10:39 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.1
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022