Must We Believe in the Virgin Birth?

AlbertMohler.com ^ | December 14, 2011 | Dr. Albert Mohler

[Judith Anne]

Oh for goodness sake, Avalon Hussar, evidently metmom andothers are not mature enough to debate without dogpiling newbies, flame-baiting those who revere Mary, or getting snide about works vs faith.

I see no maturity.

[Judith Anne]

>>>>Quit trying to make it something that it’s not.

Stop ordering me around.

[Cronos]

the problem I see with some is that they have decided that everything we believe in is what they reject.

Many are able to say "ok, we believe in this, this, this in common, but that we disagree with" -- but others want to reject everything. So they first reject one bit, then another, some rejecting the Trinity (but then unable to answer how come at Jesus' baptism there was the Father and the Son and The Holy Spirit distinct) and then as in the radical reformation and our Jehovah's Witness poster here who can count would say that Jesus is just a created being.

Many take their rejection to the extreme extent that they now believe in a negative-belief, i.e. if asked what they believe in, they seem to be either horribly ashamed of their own religion’s stance on a subject, or just too plain ignorant to be able to explain it.

[count-your-change]

Perhaps...if that were their intention. The religion threads have become insult fests with posters who know better trying to see how deep they can cut with words before being shut down. To me it's disgusting.

Saying things like “you people” or “your group”? Really! It's like asking me to speak for others...I never have and never will. Someone wants to know what I think I can say so but if they want info. do a little search...If, If information is the goal.

“When/If you are able to speak to the subject in a serious and even slightly informed way please let me know.“

Sure, it could be said as an eye poke but it might also be spot on. Depends. I see plenty of times it would be justified.

[count-your-change]

All right.. who is doing that? What are they saying? Criticizing a belief is hardly the same as criticizing the person, is it?

I don't mind debate but there's precious little of that to be found on these threads because a few think apparently that using a rafter to remove the mote in the eye of another is o.k.

Cut out 75% of the comments and the thread would be improved greatly.

[count-your-change]

Who made that statement? Source?

[Cronos]

The religion threads have become insult fests with posters who know better trying to see how deep they can cut with words before being shut down.

let me remind you of your own remarks:

• When/If you are able to speak to the subject in a serious and even slightly informed way please let me know.
• How does your cult justify child rape and murder?
• Do you have a problem with the English language?

So, please a little practise before preaching...

[Cronos]

no one’s asking any personal information as in name, gender, occupatoin — religion is not just personal, keep at home stuff. If there is a debate on a religious topic, then to know where the other comes from lays the common ground. the insults like those in the post above, don’t help

[Cronos]

link here --> Jehovah’s Witnesses Blood Transfusion Confusion

[Cronos]

who is doing that?

Well, i'm talking to you and the met, right?

it is hypocritical to say “oh, I can criticise the mote in your eye but you can’t comment on the plank in mine”....

[count-your-change]

That comment is not in the article nor attributed to anyone in the article. So who made the comment? Source?

[Hegewisch Dupa]

Huh! The negative-belief 'system' would explain a lot of the monkeyshines one sees around here. I remember talking to the pastor who married us (me and my wife; not me, Cronos and JA, lest the clowns have more fodder to spread their make-believe), who was, as is my wife, a Lutheran. I expressed my mild shock about some of the similarities 'tween his Church and Catholic ceremonies. He explained to me how, over time, his Church understood that a knee-jerk reaction to all things Catholic was childish, and there was no reason to ban things like kneeling and such, that they did in fact serve a purpose and were just booted out of spite.

Shame more denominations haven't gotten over that very mature "Cooties!" phase yet...but a church that quite clearly is unable to define itself does speak volumes for what it doesn't stand for

[Cronos]

Criticizing a belief is hardly the same as criticizing the person, is it?

true, but when one poster is talking to a say Baptist and instead of saying "you are lying" circumvents the rules to say "Baptists are liars" -- that is wrong. Cut that finessing of the rules and we can have a start to dialogue.

Let people look first at common ground before mucking up and we can actually have dialogue.

If I even ask a person if they believe in the Trinity, it's deemed a "personal information" issue? Isn't that absurd?

[Cronos]

Sticking to that bit that if I even ask a person if they believe in the Trinity, it's deemed a "personal information" issue? --> if a person DOESN'T believe in this, yes, a lot of commonality is taken away, but we do then understand where the other is coming from -- there is a Oneness Pentecostal on the forum who of course disagrees with the Trinity but is open about this and discusses it -- it means that we know at which point we can agree to disagree.

If I ask you about this and you say it is a personal question and won't answer, then any debate on the rest of the theological matters is like asking me to spar blindfolded with one hand tied behind my back

[Cronos]

you can search the thread for it — click on the link, go to the article and click CTRL+F and then type in the sentence

[Cronos]

the Lutherans are a very good case in point -- until last year I never realized how truly close we are -- Lutherans believe in the Sacrament of Marriage, in the True Presence in the Eucharist and in Confession too!

So, when it comes to a discussion on the True Presence if a Catholic and a Lutheran are debating, even fiercely, there is a mutual respect on both sides for the host. A person who belongs to another tradition like say the Baptists wouldn't have that kind of respect -- and what is worse some of the posters here would be downright antagonistic.

[count-your-change]

Why not just ask what a person thinks and why? That's “where they're coming from”. I should think it works better than “you people” or some such. There are those who don't do group think and refuse to be pushed into doing so.

My views, reasons, opinions and beliefs are mine. If you want to know about someone else’s...well, ask them.

[Cronos]

Why not just ask what a person thinks and why? That's “where they're coming from”.

Because then I get the answer that My views, reasons, opinions and beliefs are mine. and it's "none of your business" and "it's a personal question to ask me what I think about the Trinity" etc.

[count-your-change]

You made the quote, it’s not in the the article nor attributed to anyone in the article you linked to, so you either have a source of you don’t. I have no intention of doing your searching for you.

[Cronos]

My views, reasons, opinions and beliefs are mine. If you want to know about someone else’s...well, ask them.

so then share these views -- it's an open forum. To ask me to share my beliefs, views etc. and then hide behind the "it's a personal question" curtain when the same question is turned to the questioner is hypocritical