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
See more
See less

International Fellowship of Christians and Jews

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    You have appeared to have acknowledged that you do not believe your deity to be benign, omnipotent, or omniscient.
    Your goofy version of God is not the God of the Bible.

    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

      Your goofy version of God is not the God of the Bible.
      There are various versions of God in the bible, which one are you referencing?
      "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


      • #63
        Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

        There are various versions of God in the bible, which one are you referencing?
        The one where He has FAR MORE qualities and characteristics than you dishonestly or ignorantly portray.

        But thank you for making my point.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
          No 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.
          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?

          Comment


          • #65
            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.
            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.
            "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


            • #66
              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.
              Defensive? Calm yourself, woman.

              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


              • #67
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                Defensive? Calm yourself, woman.
                I 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.

                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                There are not "different versions" but a much broader picture of God that you dishonestly or ignorantly choose to paint.
                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.
                "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


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                  I 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.
                  Ah, so countering your goofy notions is "being defensive". And I don't see it as "perceived attacks" -- I see it as an ignorant person talking about something outside her wheelhouse.

                  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.
                  Yet, somehow, you choose only to narrowly select attributes to create your strawman god....

                  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


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                    Ah, so countering your goofy notions is "being defensive".
                    Read back through your own and Sparko's replies. The language was defensive and implied that I did not know anything and was reluctant to learn the "truth" by reading Genesis - which apparently is all I need to do in order to gain the esoteric knowledge that Sparko possesses.

                    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 Post
                    And I don't see it as "perceived attacks" -- I see it as an ignorant person talking about something outside her wheelhouse
                    Of course you do. That last comment simply reinforces what I have written above. Once again the implication is made that your beliefs are automatically correct and my observations [because I question your beliefs] are automatically wrong.

                    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.
                    I did not start this. I made a light-hearted remark re god and suffering to which no one was obliged to respond. However, both you and Sparko decided you had to try and correct me.
                    "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


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                      Read back through your own and Sparko's replies.
                      You seem quite concerned about this. You 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.

                      Fail harder.

                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                        You seem quite concerned about this
                        I 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.

                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        You 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 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.

                        "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


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          I do hate to disappoint but I am not "concerned" about any of this at all.
                          Yet, here you are, droning on and on about it....

                          However, I do like to point out duplicity and arrogance that is based on preconceptions and purely subjective viewpoints when I encounter them.
                          You love to see yourself type.

                          I did nothing of the kind. So please do not make false accusations.
                          Calm yourself, Princess - I made no false accusations. I merely told you what I believed you were up to.

                          I responded to what Sparko wrote. He had no cause to make his initial comment. Take the issue up with him.
                          Here's what you wrote....
                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          Of 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


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                            Yet, here you are, droning on and on about it....
                            Concerning "droning on and on" I recommend you look to the beam in your own eye. You have not been reluctant to make your posts to this thread.

                            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.
                            Unfortunately beliefs are not always premised on factual evidence.

                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                            This is where you begin to distort who God is
                            How can a cosmic entity be a "who"? This is not a person you are writing about. You appear entirely unable to put aside your preconceived anthropomorphic constructs.

                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            and the discussion turns to your ignorant view of God
                            Your 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


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              Concerning "droning on and on" I recommend you look to the beam in your own eye...
                              Sure

                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                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.
                                Your ignorance of what the bible actually says is glaring. You should stop while you are behind. When you can accurately describe what we believe and what the bible says, then we can have a real conversation, until then there is no use arguing with some made up straw man version of God and Christianity. You claim you have read Genesis, yet your argument shows that you haven't.

                                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.
                                Working...
                                X