Quoting from the Bible - DPChallenge Forums

07/28/2008 04:32:36 PM · #126

Originally posted by SDW:

God does not demand that you seek Him, even though that is his Will.

How do you know what God's will is? Because the Bible says so. How do you know what the Bible says is true? Because the Bible says that God says the Bible must not be changed. But, per the OP, we KNOW it's been changed, so how do you know that the changed versions bear any resemblance to the original? Because my faith says it's true. But isn't your faith based upon the words of the Bible, without which you would have no more concept of a Christian God than the Aztecs or Inuit? I don't expect people to understand, but I won't hold that failure against you and hope that you'll see the Truth as I do eventually. Does that about sum it up?

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

07/28/2008 04:51:11 PM · #127

Originally posted by d56ranger:

In my opinion, this is a totally inappropriate discussion in any of the DPC forums. I think this needs ot be moved to some religious forum on some religious web site since it has nothing to do with photography.

DPC brought us together through photography. However, this does not mean that the community is supposed to discuss photography exclusively. To prevent photography issues and other issues from being mixed up, there are different forums.

Your post sounds as if this discussion made you feel uncomfortable. If this is the case, simply don't participate and focus on the forums that interest you...

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

07/28/2008 05:01:09 PM · #128

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by SDW:
God does not demand that you seek Him, even though that is his Will.

How do you know what God's will is? Because the Bible says so. How do you know what the Bible says is true? Because the Bible says that God says the Bible must not be changed. But, per the OP, we KNOW it's been changed, so how do you know that the changed versions bear any resemblance to the original? Because my faith says it's true. But isn't your faith based upon the words of the Bible, without which you would have no more concept of a Christian God than the Aztecs or Inuit? I don't expect people to understand, but I won't hold that failure against you and hope that you'll see the Truth as I do eventually. Does that about sum it up?

I respect your questions but I have posted what I felt led to post, no more - no less. But to all your question my answer is Faith. To answer your question were does my faith come from. Yes the Bible but before the Bible I seek God and from their found the truth in the Bible. We can debate forever but debate is not within me, Faith is. I thank you [and all] for being respectful toward my beliefs and I hope I have been respectable to others. I think my two post [and this one] lets people know where I stand and that I don't judge other, that's not my job.

Message edited by author 2008-07-28 17:04:06.

07/28/2008 05:01:38 PM · #129

Originally posted by scalvert:

Perfect logic. Many people have tried before. The answer you'll get is "It's faith." which means approximately "The rules of logic don't apply here. It's like this because it is like this".

Scott, by the way, I watched your "statement of faith - rock version" you linked to. Unconventional. ;-) (The music starting at about 2:55 sounds familiar. Is it from the last of the Mohicans? Interesting...) Did you watch the video this thread is actually about?

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

07/28/2008 05:04:41 PM · #130

Evangelizing, Shannon? "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free," he says, but in the language of the atheist. That's what I asked before, but nobody would own up, and that's nearly the next thing I see...can't let the believer believe, now, can we? Gotta show him the Truth!

Oh, but it's not evangelizing, because it's really the Truth, and he believes in lies, and needs to be shown the way.

Yeah, good debate, good discussion, very enlightening.

Oooops...sorry...said I was gone. Had to pop in for one more. Addicted, I guess.

Message edited by author 2008-07-28 17:06:10.

Louis

Nikon D800

07/28/2008 05:14:47 PM · #131

Originally posted by farfel53:

Oh, but it's not evangelizing...

If a person opens up their unsubstantiated beliefs in a public forum that has nothing to do with what they personally believe, how is it "evangelizing" to point out errors of logic in their statements?

Even more pressing, how is it a helpful discussion to offer drive-by commentary laden with dripping sarcasm?

dahkota

07/28/2008 05:30:57 PM · #132

Originally posted by farfel53:

I'm confused. Why is someone who doesn't believe in the bible as historical text an atheist?

Why is it assumed that someone who points out discrepancies in the bible is trying to convert a literalist into a unbeliever (just using that word for continuity)?

On a separate note, Scott, thank you for answering my question. While I may not agree with your opinion, I respect your faith.

07/28/2008 05:34:06 PM · #133

Can't help you there, Louis. You guys are so 100% sure that you have the "Truth", that you don't even see that you do exactly the same things you accuse the Christian evangelists of doing. You're not even particulalry polite or smooth in doing it. Here's the truth, shoved in your teeth without so much as a spoon full of sugar or a how do you do.

Here's the clincher: what if YOU are wrong? What IF the Bible DOES have so much truth in it that a man or woman wanting to know if there IS a God, and willing to respond to Him in a positive and personal way CAN find Him, and find wisdom and instruction and love and peace and care for his fellow man and hope for the future here on earth and into eternity. But NO...it can't be...because our "logic" demands that it can't be. You're missing out on so much because it can't possibly fit in with your thoughts and beliefs.

What DO you have faith in that is unsubstantiated? Lots of you have faith in "mankind", which is a huge joke if you ask me. Or you have faith in "society", which is even more fragile and able to produce incredible grotesque governments and genocides.

Or do you believe in psychic phenomena, or paranormal this or that? Probably not, you are intelligent...just not so much that you realise you "could" be wrong.

07/28/2008 05:38:03 PM · #134

Originally posted by farfel53:

Evangelizing, Shannon?

Nope. All I did was summarize his posts and ask if the circular logic was accurate. How is that evangelizing? I didn't propose any alternate belief or call to think as I do.

07/28/2008 05:48:01 PM · #135

Originally posted by scalvert:

"...you'll see the Truth as I do eventually" How is that NOT evangelizing, Shannon? I can't believe you can't see it. You are taking the high position of correctness, blessedness, enlightenment, and wishing it upon the "ignorant", with a full measure of superiority and condescension thrown in. What else is "evangelizing"? "Here, buddy, take what I have, and you'll be better off with it."

Message edited by author 2008-07-28 17:48:48.

07/28/2008 05:51:54 PM · #136

Originally posted by farfel53:

[...] what if YOU are wrong?

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg

Could we now please get back to the original topic?

farfel53, with every additional comment you make, you confirm my impression that you are simply trying to keep the argument going. Maybe you'd like to go here: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HaRFBSq9k

07/28/2008 05:53:58 PM · #137

Originally posted by farfel53:

"...you'll see the Truth as I do eventually" How is that NOT evangelizing, Shannon?

HAHAHA! That's NOT my position. Read it again- the whole thing was summarizing SDW's posts. The line you quoted summarizes this: "Do I expect some to understand, No! Do I wish that everyone did, Yes! But my roll in life is not to condemn people that don't believe as I do, but to be Christ-like in my ways as I seek God everyday in hopes that they would like to seek Him.[/i]"

Message edited by author 2008-07-28 19:13:17.

07/28/2008 05:56:28 PM · #138

Whatever, Sam. You guys don't really wan't to discuss the topic, you just want agreement. Nobody will respond with any honesty or any consideration of opposing viewpoints. A believer is just plain wrong, ignorant, uneducated, uninformed. Go back to your topic, and I'll leave you alone...probably. I just have a hard time seeing arrogance and foolishness slide on by unanswered.

Peace.

dahkota

07/28/2008 05:58:24 PM · #139

Originally posted by farfel53:

You never answered my questions.

07/28/2008 05:59:57 PM · #140

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by farfel53:
"...you'll see the Truth as I do eventually" How is that NOT evangelizing, Shannon?

HAHAHA! That's NOT my position. Read it again- the whole thing was summarizing SDW's posts. The line you quoted summarizes this: "But my roll in life is not to condemn people that don't believe as I do, but to be Christ-like in my ways as I seek God everyday in hopes that they would like to seek Him."

My mistake. Excuse me. It seemed to fit your point of view perfectly, didn't it?

Message edited by author 2008-07-28 18:02:25.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

07/28/2008 06:59:01 PM · #141

Originally posted by farfel53:

It seemed to fit your point of view perfectly, didn't it?

Not. At. All.

Louis

Nikon D800

07/28/2008 07:04:06 PM · #142

Originally posted by farfel53:

Well, this is all patently false. When you say "nobody will respond with honesty or consideration of opposing viewpoints", you are apparently really saying, "nobody will concede every point I make and their failure to agree with my argument makes them dishonest". Never mind the fact that you have proposed nothing of substance in the first place. The accusation that anyone is calling anyone else ignorant, uneducated, and uninformed is false, though I see that you have called others arrogant and foolish with no real cause.

If you see arrogance and foolishness in everything everyone else says that is in direct opposition to your own world view, I would suggest that the myopia is actually on your side. The question you originally tried to ask unfairly is immediately raised and seems quite apropos: why participate? You get only aggravation as opposed to discourse, you see only arrogant fools and liars as opposed to intelligent participants, and you can't help but deliver sarcastic and acidic farewells every five minutes. Really, why bother?

As for reading books that challenge your views and may actually wind up being enlightening, why not read Julian Baggini's excellent little book in Oxford's "Very Short Introduction" series called "Atheism"? I only just picked it up a short while ago and it's very good. It is a quick 111-page read and addresses the usual arguments such as you've raised, i.e., the perception that atheism is "just another faith", the possibility for dogmatism in atheism (you suggested, incorrectly in my view, that Shannon was "evangelizing"), and more, such as the misperception that atheism is a strict form of materialism and so on. If you actually enjoy discourse despite how aggravated you seem to get, you'll also find pointers on what makes a good argument, so you may find defending your positions much easier and less annoying, should you read this book.

Message edited by author 2008-07-28 19:05:40.

RayEthier

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

07/28/2008 10:29:59 PM · #143

Originally posted by farfel53:

.
... Or you have faith in "society", which is even more fragile and able to produce incredible grotesque governments and genocides

I read this and started thinking about the crusades and the inquisition...

Ray

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

07/29/2008 09:45:44 AM · #144

I apologise to all. I admit I do get somewhat riled, and you don't deserve some of the crap I start to throw. I don't see what you see, you don't see what I see, and nothing is going to change in this forum, in this thread. I'm a lousy arguer.

It all comes down to this for me: if you're going to disregard the Bible as having any relevance, due to it having "errors" and "discrepancies", what is the point of discussing it? It's an historic book, you say, and interesting...O.K., but it claims, many times, that it is SO much more than just that. If it isn't "true", then it's false, and doesn't deserve the time of day. All of this becomes just so much sucking of wind.

But I will maintain one more time - even if it does have human error, there is HUGE benefit from it's study.

Ray - I was referring to Hitler, and Lenin and Stalin, and Pol Pot, and Mao, and Amin, and Darfur, etc, and many more could be named. You automatically think of "church" when you think of "atrocity"? Hmmmm...

Louis - I appreciate that you are well educated, and likely trained in debate and philosophy, which I obviously am not. Do you actually have an opinion in this discussion? Or is your function to point out the fallacy of others positions? And yes, I know my sarcasm "drips" at times. Yours is just a little more refined, and doesn't drip nearly so much.

Shannon - I apologise directly to you. You did not deserve my tirade. I did go back and read more carefully, and though I still thought your tone toward Scott was a bit high-minded, it was definetly not as I characterized it.

I'll again try to just stay out of such discussions in the future.

Peace...no, really!

Apple iPhone 5

07/29/2008 09:57:57 AM · #145

And I'll miss you most of all, Scarecrow.

Phil

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

07/29/2008 10:11:31 AM · #146

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by farfel53:
.
... Or you have faith in "society", which is even more fragile and able to produce incredible grotesque governments and genocides

I read this and started thinking about the crusades and the inquisition...

Ray

Of course you did.

RayEthier

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

07/29/2008 10:45:46 AM · #147

Originally posted by farfel53:

Ray - I was referring to Hitler, and Lenin and Stalin, and Pol Pot, and Mao, and Amin, and Darfur, etc, and many more could be named. You automatically think of "church" when you think of "atrocity"? Hmmmm...

I am quite aware of the atrocities committed by those you allude to, but one must not overlook the fact that religion has indeed been used as a means to justify wanton acts of agression against a myriad of people.

Mine was merely an effort to balance out the views you proferred, which seemed to suggest that atrocities were the direct result of "society", and that in your definition of governments seemingly excluded religion, which sadly is not the case.

I do not automatically think of "church" when I think of "atrocity", but by the same token, I do not exclude it simply because it is the church... therein lies the difference.

Ray

blindjustice

07/29/2008 11:31:37 AM · #148

We get in these big arguments here, and eventually there are certain people that claim religion bashing and christian bashing, but when you look at teh profiles, its mostly "Bible belt" or Soouthern United States- dare I use the "red state" moniker.

I am not trying to disparage these posters or members in anyway- but there is a different in-built culture in certain parts of the South that just does not exist elsewhere. It is almost taken for granted that you believe as fervently as the next person. Even in the midst of Catholic Northeast Irish and Italian enclaves, there is not the same fervor.

My point is, we have to understand all of the different perspectives that come here. I think that some of the first mentioned people are not here to discuss, nice of otherwise- but they are here to prosthelitize.

At least once in every "discussion" you get the "Its gods will" - and the "only way to heaven" lines- I wish there was a bit more tolerance for others Ideas and a path towards discussion rather than plain old missionary style talk.

07/30/2008 03:07:21 PM · #149

I see our little discussion has been moved to "Rant". Does anyone know why this happened? The original topic cannot be the reason (the thread would have been moved earlier). So is it the development of the discussion?

Can I get any thread moved to "Rant" by simply starting to troll in there?

dahkota