Westboro Baptist Church to visit.

foxtrapper wrote:

SVreX wrote: Perhaps the real issue is that you have a particular pet issue which runs contrary to the core beliefs of Christianity.

You're closer to the mark than you realise, but not for the reasons you believe. I'm not a dogmaist. I think instead. This offends most members of the organized christian churches, as well those organizations themselves.

I didn't suggest a reason. Why would you assume you know what I believe?

I have over 4400 posts on this board in the last 6 years. I welcome you to peruse all of them and come to your own logical and educated conclusion whether I am a thinker or a dogmatist. Anyone who knows me would confirm that I am an extremely logical thinker. I take no offense to your thinking. I take offense to your suggestion that because I am a man of faith, that I fail to think.

Looks like dogma (a dogmatic belief that there is one type of "thinking" that is inherently better than another type of "thinking", and rules out the other without logical consideration).

They were going to go to one of my buddies funerals, well a phone call to them and a half hour on the phone detailing the horrors they'd suffer and they didn't show. So that shows me who the fags are, nothing against homosexuals btw.

SVreX wrote: ....There are 2 active threads on this board right now that go a long way toward bashing Christians. Both have made statements to the effect that people of faith don't think, or faith is the opposite of logic and reason. If I started a thread called "101 Quotes supporting Christianity", or "101 Reasons why anyone who is not a Christian is an Idiot" most on this board would be quite offended, and rightfully so. Yet it seems to be acceptable, encouraged, even desirable to do it in reverse...

Personally, I don't think that people of faith don't think, I just noted that the very essence of faith means it cannot be argued (in any form). There are certainly many examples of very intelligent people who have a strong religious faith.

As far as the threads. Would "101 Christian Quotes" cause argument and discussion? Certainly, that is the whole point! and as long as things don't get ugly, it's can be very educational. I personally enjoy them since I can learn things and hopefully we can all learn.

There does seem to be a minority of solidly religious people on the board (putting a bit of a burden on you). Which is interesting considering that there "should" be a majority in the general population(!?), based on what I have heard. Not sure what that means, but it is interesting.

I have spent a lot of years being part of this community, and making my best effort to be encouraging and respectful of a lot of viewpoints that differ from mine. I've certainly made a few bonehead comments, but have never called anyone dumb, ignorant, or stupid, and I have never treated anyone's opposing viewpoint with disrespect.

Note to self  quote  this at the  pearly gates and when my pizza order is incorrect

 "I have spent a lot of years odering pizza in this community, and making my best effort to be encouraging and respectful of a lot of viewpoints that differ from mine. I've certainly made a few bonehead toppings requests, but have never called extra cheeze  dumb, ignorant, or stupid, and I have never treated anyone's toppings  viewpoint with disrespect""

I have spent a lot of years ordering pizza in this community, and making my best effort to be encouraging and respectful of a lot of viewpoints that differ from mine. I've certainly made a few bonehead toppings requests , but have never called anyone ordering extra cheeze dumb, ignorant, or stupid, and I have never treated anyone's opposing toppings viewpoints with disrespect.

wherethefmi2000 wrote: They were going to go to one of my buddies funerals, well a phone call to them and a half hour on the phone detailing the horrors they'd suffer and they didn't show....

Which is interesting because one of the things that I have heard is that there is a suspicion that this "faith" might have a "martyr wish". In that being killed for your faith is the highest honor you could attain. From what you say, that might not be true, or they aren't brave enough to follow through with their supposed goal.

we never said anything illegal to them or threatened their lives, I can't remember everything we said but the jist got through to them

Good for you.

Maybe they just needed to be told to go away.

Unfortunately these guys are jerks..

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

-Mahatma Gandhi

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mohandas_Karamchand_Gandhi

and I don't mean to throw all christians under the bus.. Hell I work with Habitat for Humanity now that I'm laid off and they're a great example of christian good.

SVreX wrote: I take offense to your suggestion that because I am a man of faith, that I fail to think.

I never said you don't think.

Exodus 20:16

I figured you'd say that, and I'm not going to get into a semantics game of splitting hairs with you.

Are you really trying to take scripture out of context and use it against me, while suggesting how much at odds with it you are? Might work better if you stick to what YOU believe.

SVreX wrote: I figured you'd say that, and I'm not going to get into a semantics game of splitting hairs with you. Are you really trying to take scripture out of context and use it against me, while suggesting how much at odds with it you are? Might work better if you stick to what YOU believe.

SVreX, here's something i learned many years ago on one of the previous iterations of the GRM board:

Debating with foxtrapper is like rasslin' with a pig.

AngryCorvair wrote: SVreX, here's something i learned many years ago on one of the previous iterations of the GRM board: Debating with foxtrapper is like rasslin' with a pig.

I understand.

While I find it offensive when "Church folk" use the Bible as a bludgeon, using out of context scripture to beat other people into submission, it blows me away when people who claim to be non-believers do it.

Those are frequently the same people who then call Christians hypocritical. Beautiful.

Oh, this should be good.

Go ahead and explain how I took that verse out of context.

Are you REALLY going to say that it cannot stand on its own? That it has to have a "context" in order to be understood or obeyed? What "context" does it need for you?

Lets make sure everyone understands that verse. It's just the 9th commandment, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour". Otherwise known as the "don't lie" commandment. So, what "context" issue do you have with that?

I really should be listening to Angry on this one...

OK, so you are accusing me of lying about your statement.

As long as we are being clear, why don't we take a good hard look at your original post and ask if you are sure that it can't be interpreted that you suggested I don't think, or at least hang out with fools who don't.:

foxtrapper wrote: I'm not a dogmaist. I think instead. This offends most members of the organized christian churches, as well those organizations themselves. Make no mistake, this puts me at odds with other organized religions besides christianity. It means I offend many Muslims, Hasidic jews, all major political groups, and a great many organizations. Failure to swallow dogma without question is reviled by many, especially true believers. The closest you'd find me to fitting within the conventional christian framework is as a quaker. Mostly for the basic belief that you can find and commune with god all by yourself. You don't need a preacher to tell you what to think or a church to support.

I see no reason why I should accept your slanderous suggestion that I am a liar.

If you believed in the authority of scripture, I'd suggest that it would be appropriate for him who has no sin to "cast the first stone". Translation: you can't call someone a liar while you are lying.

However, you have made your disdain for scripture clear, in spite of your desire to use it to somehow punish me. I'll assume that you would not wish to adhere to it's teachings.

Flame on.

Paul-I don't think you can say if someone is a non-believer they cannot use scripture to challenge a believers beliefs. If scripture is seen as a believers "rules", then questioning why the believer doesn't follow his/her own rules is not unreasonable. That said-not sure where you supposedly lied?

I'm not sure where I supposedly lied either. Ask foxtrapper.

I used the "first stone" reference, which probably didn't communicate well.

If Mr Foxtrapper were actually questioning me as to why I didn't follow my "own rules", or because he had a real desire to learn something, or an honest desire to help me it would be a little easier to respond. But it is clear that Mr. Foxtrapper is not actually interested in a real discourse of the subject, but only trying to win a silly little game of entrapment, in a subject area in which he has already negated before the discussion has begun.

In essence, the effort is to prove me wrong, not to ask legitimate questions.

There's very little I can offer. There is no end to the variations on out of context distortions from someone who doesn't actually have any interest in learning, only in somehow proving his manhood. It is very similar to the people about whom this thread is.

So, how about I concede now, and say foxtrapper FTW.

Having said that, for others who might actually be interested in learning, I will offer a response to the "out of context" question.

Depending on what version you read, that verse may have a lot of "Thou shalt nots", or"give false testimonies". But here's what it essentially says: "You shouldn't lie". It is a message from God to His people, or more specifically, His individual people.

Note what it doesn't say. It doesn't say, "Someone else shouldn't lie", or "Make sure that guy doesn't lie", or "See if you can catch SVreX in a sin with this baby". It is a personal message to individuals who are supposed to take it to heart and apply it to themselves out of love for the God who spoke it to them personally.

If foxtrapper (or anyone) wants to read that, take it to heart, and apply it to their lives, I support them and will do everything in my power to encourage them and enable them. If he is genuinely concerned for my welfare and wishes to correct me lovingly for my own well being, I welcome it. If he wants to use it like a bludgeon to beat people over the head and prove how "wrong" they are, or "win" a little pissing contest, then he is using it incorrectly, and has distorted it's meaning.

Just like the Westboro Baptist jerks.

aircooled wrote: Personally, I don't think that people of faith don't think, I just noted that the very essence of faith means it cannot be argued (in any form). There are certainly many examples of very intelligent people who have a strong religious faith.

I'm not entirely sure about that: If you talk to the sort of religious people who have thought their way through what they believe and why, I think you can have an intelligent discussion about what reasons they have to support their beliefs. These may not be the faith, but you can certainly hold a rational argument about the things people give as reasons they believe. You could, for example, put together arguments over whether or not Jesus's disciples genuinely believed that he rose from the dead in just the same way you could put together arguments about whether Caligula really was as perverted as they say or if "they" were a bunch of axe grinders out to smear his name.

Likewise, the last time I had a pair of Mormon missionaries stop by, we had a (relatively polite) argument about whether Mormon beliefs did or did not contradict the Bible, and what that implied about their claim that Joseph Smith was a prophet. They left a copy of the Book of Mormon, and if they come back, I intend to challenge them to an argument over whether the book is an authentic translation of an ancient document or the product of a nineteenth century mind. Being a mad scientist, my plan is to examine pieces of technology in the book and see if they were known at the time they claimed the book was written. No matter what side you're on there, I would say that reasons for supporting faith are things you can argue about.

Just because you can't measure faith with a stopwatch doesn't mean it can't be argued about. Or at least the reasons for it can, if not the faith itself.

Very nice, Matt!

There are very few people who can out-reason people like Ravi Zacharias or C.S.Lewis.

10 minutes worth of RV's show ("Let my People Think") can make the average smart fellow reconsider himself!

MadScientistMatt said: Being a mad scientist, my plan is to examine pieces of technology in the book and see if they were known at the time they claimed the book was written.

There has been extensive research about technology found in the Book of Mormon. If you visit this page you'll find out about a lot of it. Now, this page is supported by members of the LDS faith, but you'll find that they are very empirical in their search. I used to be one of those missionaries, and I'm not trying to push anything here, but I appreciate the way that you are going about this rather than the people who just put faith (of any sect) down without even regarding it intelligently. Because, yes, religion is based on faith, but not blind faith -- they're not the same thing.