| Advertise Here » Browse ad-free by donating | |
|
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
 |
| | Thread Tools |
Jun 2, 2006, 05:41 pm
| #21 (permalink) (top) |
| 9/11: Inside Job  Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438 | Let's put it this way: Language is a means of communicationg ideas among people. We agree on the meanings of words and phrases, which facilitates the transmission of ideas. If people disagree on the meanings, who gets to decide the "true" meaning? A minority of one? Or a handful, when large groups or majorities, possibly even overwhelming majorities say "No, that means something else"? I ask you, Vern. If we start a poll on Volconvo with the simple question, "Is christianity a religion?" what level of support will you have for your position? "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams |
|  |
|
Jun 2, 2006, 05:45 pm
| #22 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED: Ignored Warnings, Insults, etc  Posts: 366 | Quote:
And my answer is that as in all other things, there is absolute objective truth. It does not depend on a majority vote or anyone's "feelings". And as we have a severe dearth of literacy and understanding of reality--with everyone seemingly opting to go the easy way--the fact that most people probably disregard christianity as "just religion" is not exactly a shocker. Just as our government system is not one of majority rule, neither is the meaning of words or the reality of the world. | |
|
| |
|
Jun 2, 2006, 06:01 pm
| #23 (permalink) (top) |
| 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438 | While I agree with you regarding truth and its objectivity, one person saying "christianity isn't religion" doesn't make it so. Since language is a shared experience, you must have assent from those with whom you communicate. You are saying you wouldn't care what the results of the proposed poll would be, your view of christianity is the ONLY correct definition? Not a religion? "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams |
|
| |
|
Jun 2, 2006, 06:06 pm
| #24 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED: Ignored Warnings, Insults, etc Posts: 366 | Quote:
Gotta stop you at the first paragraph. Being a "shared experience" has nothing at all to do with it, as that argues against the reality of objective truth. This objective truth means that nothing alters that truth, and it is not subject to anyone's analysis or psychobabble. Thus the definition of "religion" as man's attempt to define/limit God puts that out of range for us who have a relationship with the Lord and thus a way of life. So you see, "religion" is the furthest thing from being a Bible-believing saint. As for "definitions" of "christianity", I have not approached that; I merely asked that we not drag Messiah through the mud of muddled and sloppy language. | |
|
| |
|
Jun 2, 2006, 06:20 pm
| #25 (permalink) (top) | ||
| 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438 | A lonely voice is yours, since you do not agree on the conventions of language... Maybe those closest to you are in agreement with your use of terms, but if you wish to spread a message you must speak the lingua franca... Quote:
Here's James 1:27 Quote:
"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams | ||
|
| |
|
Jun 2, 2006, 06:53 pm
| #26 (permalink) (top) | |||
| BANNED: Ignored Warnings, Insults, etc Posts: 366 | Quote:
Convention is not defined as truth, or as non-ignorance. Quote:
What I told you is truth, but suit yourself and believe as you like. That you are so stubborn as to not see the distinction confirms that you simply want a weapon to use against God's people. Whatever. Quote:
I never addressed the content of that verse; it has not come up. | |||
|
| |
|
Jun 3, 2006, 02:10 am
| #28 (permalink) (top) | |
  formerly Isherwood  Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 13,223 | Quote:
And dissing PH shows your inability to discern character or appreciate comradership. He and PF are two of the better debaters and defenders of their faith I've run across here. You are not at all in the same league. The Forum Rules Radical Atheist Heathen Queer Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be. (Ashleigh Brilliant) | |
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 12:26 pm
| #29 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED: Ignored Warnings, Insults, etc Posts: 366 | Quote:
I answered several times in no uncertain terms: Bible-believing christianity is a relationship and a way of life. Religion, on the other paw, is merely arrogant man's choice to redefine "God" to his (man's) own benefit and convenience. Hence the catechisms, creeds and traditions that have slandered God supposedly in God's name. As for PH, I do not know what that means. Can you help me out there? | |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 12:45 pm
| #30 (permalink) (top) |
| formerly Isherwood Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 13,223 | PH=PatrickHenry PF=phoenix_fire The Forum Rules Radical Atheist Heathen Queer Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be. (Ashleigh Brilliant) |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 03:45 pm
| #32 (permalink) (top) |
| 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438 | Vern, the Bible makes a very clear statement about religion, which I quoted to you. Do you disregard God's word and substitute your own definition of religion? "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 03:52 pm
| #33 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED: Ignored Warnings, Insults, etc Posts: 366 | Quote:
Actually you quoted one verse from James, which has to use an adjective to modify the word "religion" to impute to it anything resembling merit. But we have it in explicit terms that Messiah hates the phenomena that commonly characterize "religion". For instance, traditions and empty words. Remember that the early church had its problems, and for folks to think "Oh goodie! We are religious!" was not the way to go, even back then. Remember that Paul had to voice his condemnation for the fact that some guy in one of the churches of Asia Minor was boning his own stepmother...and this among "religious" people! What I have done, conversely, is point out that those sad characteristics of religion are of no merit at all, but rather our walk with the Lord is about relationship and a way of living. Nothing religious in that way of seeing things. :-) | |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 03:58 pm
| #34 (permalink) (top) |
| 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438 | You mean using the adjective "true" in place of the unstated but implied modifier, "fake" or false? You are playing word games, Vern. This message of yours is so exclusive that you drive sincere people away by your unwillingness to dialog... "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 04:02 pm
| #35 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED: Ignored Warnings, Insults, etc Posts: 366 | Quote:
Watch your tone, buddy. I have been straightforward in dispelling your objections to my meaning, but you have to decide whether you want the discussion to continue. Neither is anything "implied". What the author may mean is "what is commonly called 'religion' but actually is true to Messiah's contempt for religion". But then you are here just to pick a fight so it matters not to you that He is offended by religion and never spoke a good word about it. Whatever turns you on. | |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 04:16 pm
| #36 (permalink) (top) | |
| Igneous Magma Posts: 374 | Quote:
"Religion" is something anyone can become involved in. For example, atheists are vehement, and fanatically religiious in their attempt to dethrone God and deify man. Christ sets His people apart from the babble of all such confusion by personallly intervening in their lives. True faith in Him is not something they reasoned out. The truths of Christ are not "truths" which men agreed upon together and shaped into a consensus agreed upon by all. Christ is the "I am." He is as He is--not as men imagined (or-conjured) Him up to be. All others are false gods conjured up by men in their attempt to escape the only true God. Christ's people were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4). and at the time of His own choosing, He regenerates each of them and brings them into a relationship with Him. Therefore, Christianity exists as the work of God, as the church which He has called out of the world, of which He has said, "I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it." That transcends all other forms of worship. All men have a religious nature, and James spoke of the pure and undefiled works of man's religious nature which flow out of that union with Christ. Again, by noting that such works were undefiled, James shows that they are transcendent and in themselves altogether seperate from works of man's religious nature which do not flow out of a person's devotion to Christ. Men often look upon a person's actions as the only required definition of that person''s existence, but God looks upon the heart, meaning, in other words, that actions do not define the heart and innermost reality of who someone is; in other words, there are those whose works are condemned because they flow out of something other than a heart devoted to Christ. Even if Vern and Zhavric take the same actions, they will do so with different motivations. Vern, Phoenix Fire, Or Patrick will take action with an intent to serve and glorify Christ. Zhavric and those of other persuasions will do so with ANY intent other than yielding themselves to the service of God's glory. Last edited by twoanickel; Jun 4, 2006 at 04:56 pm. | |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 06:29 pm
| #37 (permalink) (top) | |
| formerly Isherwood Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 13,223 | Quote:
The Forum Rules Radical Atheist Heathen Queer Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be. (Ashleigh Brilliant) | |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 06:52 pm
| #38 (permalink) (top) |
 68 Dead LEO's in 08  Location: Washington, WV Posts: 1,757 | If you don't believe in God that is your choice, I choose to have faith and I am greatly offended by people who constantly want to ridicule me for doing so, do I ridicule you fro not believing? do I belittle your choices? the answer to both questions are NO, so why don't you let me live my life the way I choose and you live yours the way you choose, I won't try to convince you your wrong and you won't try to convince me I'm wrong, the founders intended for religion to not be a part of public debate, they intended and correctly I would say for it to be a choice for every person to make without incrimination or persecution from others or the government. |
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 08:02 pm
| #39 (permalink) (top) | |||||
| 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,438 | Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But dumping on true religion doesn't make you a holy man, just a word gamester... "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams | |||||
|
| |
|
Jun 4, 2006, 09:26 pm
| #40 (permalink) (top) |
| Ch Latour 61  Location: Maryland Posts: 638 | It seems to me that Christianity almost demands that one have an infantile view of God. Otherwise, you could not be a servile follower of the 'canon', but would insist on an interactive religion that one was free to interpret as one saw fit. A religion with no followers and no leaders would be a religion for adults. |
|
| |
