Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Church History 201 Guidelines
Welcome to Church History 201.
Believe it or not, this is the exact place where Luther first posted the 94 thesis. We convinced him to add one.
This is the forum where the Church and its actions in history can be discussed. Since CH201, like the other fora in the History department, is not limited to participation along lines of theology, all may post here. This means that anything like Ecclesiology can be discussed without the restrictions of the Ecclesiology forum, and without the atmosphere of Ecclesiology 201 or the Apologetics-specific forum.
Please keep the Campus Decorum in mind when posting here--while 'belief' restrictions are not in place, common decency is and such is not the area to try disembowel anyone's faith.
If you need to refresh yourself on the decorm, now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
Believe it or not, this is the exact place where Luther first posted the 94 thesis. We convinced him to add one.
This is the forum where the Church and its actions in history can be discussed. Since CH201, like the other fora in the History department, is not limited to participation along lines of theology, all may post here. This means that anything like Ecclesiology can be discussed without the restrictions of the Ecclesiology forum, and without the atmosphere of Ecclesiology 201 or the Apologetics-specific forum.
Please keep the Campus Decorum in mind when posting here--while 'belief' restrictions are not in place, common decency is and such is not the area to try disembowel anyone's faith.
If you need to refresh yourself on the decorm, now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
International Fellowship of Christians and Jews
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Your goofy version of God is not the God of the Bible."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
There are various versions of God in the bible, which one are you referencing?
But thank you for making my point.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostNo I just required an answer to a question.
You have appeared to have acknowledged that you do not believe your deity to be benign, omnipotent, or omniscient.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
I didn't say that either. You just can't help burning straw men can you? Your description is incomplete like your conclusion. But as a clue, God is not "benign" and you left out various other characteristics like "sinless" "just" - Your idea that we believe in some sort of big huggy bear in the sky is ridiculous. And your idea of what God created is equally false. Why are you refusing to do some homework? Are you afraid if you touch a bible it will burn your hands?Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
The one where He has FAR MORE qualities and characteristics than you dishonestly or ignorantly portray.
But thank you for making my point.
As previously stated there are various different versions of god in the Hebrew bible. The god found in the primitive parts of the Old Testament is not the god of Second Temple Judaism.
.
Nor can the existence of suffering and misery be reconciled with a belief in an omnipotent and omniscient creator being that is both benevolent and takes a direct interest in the affairs of human beings.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostYou both suddenly become very defensive when someone makes an objective remark about the texts found in the Bible and the concept of the Christian deity.
As previously stated there are various different versions of god in the Hebrew bible. The god found in the primitive parts of the Old Testament is not the god of Second Temple Judaism.
.
Nor can the existence of suffering and misery be reconciled with a belief in an omnipotent and omniscient creator being that is both benevolent and takes a direct interest in the affairs of human beings.
There are not "different versions" but a much broader picture of God that you dishonestly or ignorantly choose to paint.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Defensive? Calm yourself, woman.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostThere are not "different versions" but a much broader picture of God that you dishonestly or ignorantly choose to paint."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostI am quite calm it is your good self and Sparko who took up a position to oppose any perceived attacks by me upon your religious viewpoints.
Of course there are. Academics in the field of bible scholarship have long recognised that the various books now contained in Hebrew Bible were written long after the events that they purport to describe, and that the Hebrew Bible was produced by composite writers and editors in a long and exceedingly complex literary process that stretched over a thousand years. Furthermore the biases of those various nationalist parties who wrote the Bible are often remarkably obvious; and finally many of the biblical stories are legend-like and abound with miraculous and fantastic elements that strain the credulity of almost any modern reader.
Seriously --- you're not doing yourself any favors by pretending to be interested in a topic just so you can go off the rails like this.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Ah, so countering your goofy notions is "being defensive".
Hence you both used phrases such as my "goofy version of God" and that this god "is so much more than you can imagine", or that my "ideas of God and creation are completely wrong, therefore your conclusion is also wrong". or that I was "demonstrating profound ignorance".
The subtext of all those remarks being that Sparko and yourself have some form of arcane knowledge which I do not possess and that because I do not share your beliefs I must clearly be in error.
I was then instructed to read Genesis as if by doing so I would in some way gain this enlightenment. As a point of information for Sparko I have read Genesis. However, unlike him I read these texts critically and objectively as I would any ancient text.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAnd I don't see it as "perceived attacks" -- I see it as an ignorant person talking about something outside her wheelhouse
The underlying textual implication is once again made that I lack knowledge [to wit that I am "talking about something outside her wheelhouse".]
I ask you again, did you ever study Lit Crit and Language at school?
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Seriously --- you're not doing yourself any favors by pretending to be interested in a topic just so you can go off the rails like this."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostRead back through your own and Sparko's replies.
Fail harder.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
You seem quite concerned about this
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostYou started a phony thread pretending to want information on one subject, and you morphed it into an idiotic attempt to get us to engage with you on your phony notion of God.
I responded to what Sparko wrote. He had no cause to make his initial comment. Take the issue up with him.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostI do hate to disappoint but I am not "concerned" about any of this at all.
However, I do like to point out duplicity and arrogance that is based on preconceptions and purely subjective viewpoints when I encounter them.
I did nothing of the kind. So please do not make false accusations.
I responded to what Sparko wrote. He had no cause to make his initial comment. Take the issue up with him.Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostOf course I could turn your question around to you and ask Why does your loving deity permit the suffering and cruelty in the first place?
This is where you begin to distort who God is, and the discussion turns to your ignorant view of God. No need to take up the issue with Sparko, because he also saw your silly little strawman god.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Yet, here you are, droning on and on about it....
I am simply reinforcing a point.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
I made no false accusations. I merely told you what I believed you were up to.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
This is where you begin to distort who God is
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Postand the discussion turns to your ignorant view of God
Throughout human history there have been [and still are] numerous other concepts of deity. Yours is merely one among many.
If we go back far enough into human history it is probable that the earliest human deities were female. It is the Venus of Willendorf after all! https://www.donsmaps.com/images28/ve...rfimg_1451.jpg
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostConcerning "droning on and on" I recommend you look to the beam in your own eye...
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
You both suddenly become very defensive when someone makes an objective remark about the texts found in the Bible and the concept of the Christian deity.
As previously stated there are various different versions of god in the Hebrew bible. The god found in the primitive parts of the Old Testament is not the god of Second Temple Judaism.
.
Nor can the existence of suffering and misery be reconciled with a belief in an omnipotent and omniscient creator being that is both benevolent and takes a direct interest in the affairs of human beings.
Describe for us what you think Christians believe about what Genesis is teaching about who God is, the nature of his Creation and the Fall. If you can't accurately represent our beliefs, you have no chance at arguing against them. Clue: We don't believe in the straw man God or creation you have presented either.
Last edited by Sparko; 01-26-2021, 10:51 AM.
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment