Posted on 09/22/2001 10:00:05 AM PDT by BibChr
Are you implying there was a version earlier than Mohammed?
Regarding the James/Lynn debate:
The host congregation for the debate was so distressed by the disrespectful conduct of the debate, that they asked for an apology from White.
http://members.aol.com/presbycmoriches/debate.htm
Dan
Dan
bump
You have been very cordial in your replies and for that I thank you.
"I accept your beliefs and the reasons you hold them."
I don't understand this statement.You accept my belief? Wouldn't you then claim to be a christian?I'll assume you mean you accept my right to believe what I believe.You accept my reasons? I disagree.
ie: "Of course it's your good right to think so but I can tell you that this is not going to work and not just because this has been done over and over again with no satisfactorily result but because religious teachings/holy books are always subject to interpretation. Therefore if you're skilled enough you can make them mean whatever you want them to mean."
So you see,you do not accept them.However,say I put the bible away and explain to you how I see the world and you decide wether it lines up with what you see?
You also did not address my reasons for believing....you went straight past them as though they were non-existant and that more than once.You now say you accept them.....but in reality you don't.
"In science that's of course an other issue and it's done all the time because that's the way science works but concerning religions that's always a futile venture."
That's a bow you have drawn past the breaking point.It simply isn't true,at least not in the absolute sense you have stated it.
"No, I don't believe I am immune to this, I'm a human after all but I'm aware that it can happen. Therefore I try to question everything I think I'm really convinced of. And I don't see that doubts are strong held convictions. So I just want to make clear, before any misconceptions arise, that I am "not convinced that any god(s) exist" and not "convinced that god(s) don't exist" (and no, it's not the same)."
It's good that you question what you believe,not many do.However,I gave you a reason why I believe what I believe and surely (if you claim to be rational)you must compare it with what you see to determine wether it lines up with reality or not yes?
"I hope you realize that "not being convinced" cannot be a strong held conviction"
What if a person doesn't want to be convinced?.
You are right when you say these things can go on forever.You can site me a ton of web-sites that argue that what I believe is not a sufficient description of reality and I can do likewise.There are some things that can be argued almost endlessly it seems....provided certain things are kept out of the arena of discussion.
Let me put this to you as another reason for beleiving what I believe.
In the field of human competition,there is almost always the need for an umpire...somebody the contestants mentally assent to as being the highest authority in the game.The higher the competion factor and the more there is at stake...the greater the need for the umpire.If the contestants already know the rules and conditions of play (and we'll assume that most who compete are mentally competent enough to understand them) then why can't we simply rely on reason to rule and dispense with the uneccessary intrusion of an umpire?
Isn't it true to say that if anyone has an agenda,then their reasoning can be suspect?
Imagine what might happen if a society adopts (or has it forced upon them) a world-view in which the competition factor simply kept multiplying...(let alone the actual stakes)while at the very same time the reality (and therefore the mental assent) of the umpire kept diminishing?
How long do you believe the Superbowl game would last if the umpire became irrelevant to the players?...the answer to that goes a long way to explaining why the world is like it is.
Assuming the game would continue regardless,eventually those who hold the most physical strength would win,wether that be money,political power,military power,the loudest mouth etc etc etc.In the end numbers would determine what was acceptable....we might not like that (especially considering the 'herd' element)but it is the reality of the situation.
I'll leave it up to you as to wether this lines up with the real world or not.
"No, I don't believe I am immune to this, I'm a human after all..."
LOL...Aren't we all!
Wouldn't it be fair to say that to best be in a position to see reality as it is,warts and all,we need to be in a position where we had no sub-concious agendas lurking around?(wether that's actually possible or not is another matter,but you get my drift yes?)
Roman's 4:16 "Therefore it is of faith(trusting/leaning fully on what Jesus Christ has done through His crucifiction AND resurrection),that it might be by grace(the unmerited favour of God),to the end that the promise might be sure..."
I do believe the bible because it is the best description of the world I see and in particular because of it's profound understanding of the human race.
Thanks again for your reply friend.
I have been candid with you BMCDA,and maybe a little blunt.However I think you will agree that if the bible actually is the message of the creator to His created then we cannot posibly hope to entirely comprehend the scope of what is happening...but we surely must try.
To that end....
"For God so loved the world,that He gave His only begotten Son,that whoever believes on Him should not perish but have everlasting life" (John 3:16)
May God bless you BMCDA
and may God bless America.
Depending upon how familiar he is with those Scriptures he quoted, he may or may not have known that whoever prepared the text of what he was to say, left anything out. I'm fairly certain he probably _trusted_ those with *credentials* who claim to teach God's Word, to supply the texts which would be faithful to the Scriptures.
It was deliberately left out, however, of BOTH presentations .... probably by the same "politically correct" speech writer, who may not even be a "professing" Christian.
Along those same lines, I happened to have my car radio on the night the Hollywood types held their telethon. The man who began the telethon with the "Pledge of Allegiance", deliberately left out the one nation "under God" part. That's when I shut it off.
BTTT
I kind of think that people who get too obssesed [sic] with avoding [sic] religeon [sic] end up behaving just as bad as the Taliban! Once you imerse [sic] yourself deep in irreligeon [half-sic], you have no principle beyond your own prejudices, and you start to think that your irreligeon [half-sic] is superior to Jesus.
Dan
The commentary does not concern who was right or wrong in the debate, but rather the breach of debate protocol, and apparently good manners, by White and his fans. Intentional disrespect to an invited guest is just plain bad form. Civility, especially in a church when debating another minister, is not too much to ask. You make the apostacy accusation very easily. I guess you set that threshold very low.
Dan
"The Winner [of the Skull and Crossbones Award] is James White! for changing the grace of God into a "license for immorality" (Jude 4) with the following statement:...
What White thinks is the gospel of grace is really a license for immorality, which Christians are to contend against (Jude 3,4)."
link
There seems to be very little discussion of this part of the thread title. It deserves better, certainly better than I can render, but...
My take on repentance makes a distinction between self-hatred and sincere regret for one's actions or lack of action. God forgives those who repent. In other words, your participation is necessary in the process of forgiveness.
As a nation, where we've been wrong, we should repent...no we MUST repent to be granted God's grace. It has to happen. If we've done His will, He knows, too.
Do we go off on a "We're so bad, God could never forgive us." funk? No. Repentance and forgiveness are both an end and a new beginning. Realization of error and sin should lead to repentance. Repentance should lead to a new heart that strives to do the things expected of us. "Love the Lord with all our heart, our soul and mind....and love our neighbor as ourselves."
God keeps score, but we're the one's running up the total. He is merciful and willing to forgive...if we're willing to admit it when we're wrong. The need for repentance existed before the WTC attack, it exists now, it will exist tomorrow. We're just not perfect. So, until we are, repentance will be a necessity. Thanks for reading.
No more links! I'm depressed enough! /c8-
Dan
Pray for GW and NY!
God Bless America
It isn't hard.
I guess I'll just keep going to my old church, which is doubtless also apostate, and leave the theological bickering to those who enjoy it.
You say prayer-warriors. Actually, I think (Peretti and Charismaticism to the contrary notwithstanding) Satan is not terribly intimidated by prayer.
But what he hates is Bible-warriors! Remember, when he tried His moves on the Lord Jesus, Satan was not overcome by naked divine power, nor was he repelled by prayer! How did our Lord respond to Satan?
"It is written!""It is written!"
"It is written!"
"It is written!"
Remember, too, that Paul identified only one weapon in the Christian's armory: the sword of the Spirit, which is the WORD OF GOD! (Ephesians 6:17b).
One brother's encouragement.
Amen!
"There seems to be very little discussion of this part of the thread title."
True enough...sorry Dan.
However, I do believe I am trying to help BMCDA (and hopefully some lurkers)'change his mind' so I assume Dan will indulge me.
grace and peace to you all
God bless
ps:BMCDA I won't be near a 'puter for 4-5 days so I will be a while getting back to you.take care friend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.