Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

elfdream · 07-20-2012, 12:47 PM

There are articles scattered all over the net about the low convert retention in the LDS church and that they are also suffering from a rather sizable exodus. Google it...there are some interesting reads.

07-20-2012, 02:20 PM

(07-20-2012 10:04 AM)Trapped Pentecostal Wrote:
(07-20-2012 08:00 AM)Bob M Wrote: It is a well developed theology over many years, 2 Master's degrees and 15 years studying the Bible in ministry. That is where it came from. Since you are an Atheist in religious conviction, I doubt if I took the time and spelled all the details out that it would make any difference with you.

If it requires two Masters degrees and 15 years of studying the Bible to understand your "proof" of God, then is it fair to say that he hasn't made himself very accessible to his creation? It almost sounds like he doesn't want people to believe in him. Yet if I don't believe in him, after asking for proof of his existence for twenty years, I'm made out to be the bitter one?

I would also note that you have not posted one substantial rebuttal to even one of my arguments on these boards. Not one. Every one of your arguments is a variation of the argument from authority fallacy or circular reasoning. Every one.

You think you have proof that God exists and the Bible is the ultimate authority in the Universe? Then go ahead. Prove it. Put your money where your mouth is. That will make you the most significant believer ever in the history of mankind, because you will have been the very first human to actually have proof. I'll be right here, anxiously anticipating it. You think I'm not worthy to receive that proof? Fine. Then if I go to hell, remember that you had PROOF that God exists and the Bible is his word to humanity, and that you could have convinced me of that fact. Even if you showed me that proof and I denied it was truth, you could at least have a clear conscience. If God won't prove himself to me, then it's up to you to do so, since you say you have proof; if you won't do so, then you have condemned me, and others like me, to hell.

I don't need to.

Trapped Pentecostal · 07-20-2012, 02:28 PM

(07-20-2012 02:20 PM)Bob M Wrote: I don't need to.

That's what they all say. Because they can't.

Trapped Pentecostal · (This post was last modified: 07-20-2012 02:43 PM by Trapped Pentecostal.)

Let's see. Christian excuses for not posting their Amazing Proof of God and His Authority:

You've already made up your mind.
You know the truth, you are just in denial.
God doesn't need to prove himself to anyone.
If I gave you proof of God, then you couldn't believe on faith.
You wouldn't understand it anyway.
Without God's spirit, you wouldn't understand.
It's not my job to prove anything to you.
You aren't truly seeking him, so he won't reveal himself to you.
You don't have the super-secret decoder ring that I got in my cereal.
You aren't worth the time to explain it, since you're not earnestly seeking God.
The Lord warned against casting pearls before swine.

Am I forgetting any?

elfdream · 07-20-2012, 03:03 PM

(07-20-2012 02:42 PM)Trapped Pentecostal Wrote: Let's see. Christian excuses for not posting their Amazing Proof of God and His Authority:

You've already made up your mind.

You know the truth, you are just in denial.

God doesn't need to prove himself to anyone.

If I gave you proof of God, then you couldn't believe on faith.

You wouldn't understand it anyway.

Without God's spirit, you wouldn't understand.

It's not my job to prove anything to you.

You aren't truly seeking him, so he won't reveal himself to you.

You don't have the super-secret decoder ring that I got in my cereal.

You aren't worth the time to explain it, since you're not earnestly seeking God.

The Lord warned against casting pearls before swine.

Am I forgetting any?

If you know all the answers why are you still asking the questions? Isn't that the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Which is a joke btw...so don't take it too seriously. Back when I was at the point of being non believer I didn't go from believer to believer asking them to prove anything. I just let them...be.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't understand the point of this exercise.

FmrMarine · 07-20-2012, 03:08 PM

(07-20-2012 03:03 PM)elfdream Wrote:
(07-20-2012 02:42 PM)Trapped Pentecostal Wrote: Let's see. Christian excuses for not posting their Amazing Proof of God and His Authority:

You've already made up your mind.

You know the truth, you are just in denial.

God doesn't need to prove himself to anyone.

If I gave you proof of God, then you couldn't believe on faith.

You wouldn't understand it anyway.

Without God's spirit, you wouldn't understand.

It's not my job to prove anything to you.

You aren't truly seeking him, so he won't reveal himself to you.

You don't have the super-secret decoder ring that I got in my cereal.

You aren't worth the time to explain it, since you're not earnestly seeking God.

The Lord warned against casting pearls before swine.

Am I forgetting any?

If you know all the answers why are you still asking the questions? Isn't that the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Which is a joke btw...so don't take it too seriously. Back when I was at the point of being non believer I didn't go from believer to believer asking them to prove anything. I just let them...be.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't understand the point of this exercise.

I think what elicited the heavy-handed response was the comment by Bob that said the bible was the 100% final authority in the universe or something. That statement is a bit absurd since the bible is full of a lot of unscientific crap. And I don't think Bob is looking to stone women who weren't virgins on their wedding night as directed in the bible. He's probably not beating his slave, but not so bad as to kill the slave as is directed in the bible. And he probably doesn't have a problem interacting with a woman who happens to be on her period despite the fact that the bible says not to. The point being, despite the fact that Bob claims the bible to be the final authority for the universe, he probably disregards a lot of it, so the comment seemed a bit silly.

07-20-2012, 03:16 PM

(07-20-2012 03:08 PM)FmrMarine Wrote:
(07-20-2012 03:03 PM)elfdream Wrote: If you know all the answers why are you still asking the questions? Isn't that the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Which is a joke btw...so don't take it too seriously. Back when I was at the point of being non believer I didn't go from believer to believer asking them to prove anything. I just let them...be.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't understand the point of this exercise.

I think what elicited the heavy-handed response was the comment by Bob that said the bible was the 100% final authority in the universe or something. That statement is a bit absurd since the bible is full of a lot of unscientific crap. And I don't think Bob is looking to stone women who weren't virgins on their wedding night as directed in the bible. He's probably not beating his slave, but not so bad as to kill the slave as is directed in the bible. And he probably doesn't have a problem interacting with a woman who happens to be on her period despite the fact that the bible says not to. The point being, despite the fact that Bob claims the bible to be the final authority for the universe, he probably disregards a lot of it, so the comment seemed a bit silly.

I have said this before, it has to be rightly interpreted, and the Bible represents itself as being two covenants. The old one was with Israel. The new one is with the church. And the rules that you regularly, consistently try to accuse Bible believers of ignoring are part of the old covenant. It is not an easy, simple delineation. There are moral imperatives that are basically restated or re-emphasized in the New Covenant, and others that were social or simply meant as establishing Israel as a people set apart from the other nations of the world. I do not have all the answers. I was a strict dispensationalist for many years, and having come out of that, I have been learning the emptiness of that system and trying to understand the relationship between the covenants. So I am not a perfect interpreter. But I am confident that the Bible is a final authority. God said it in the Old Testament and Jesus, who is God, re-emphasized it in similar words in the New Testament, that their words will last forever, even though the rest of the universe will pass away.

And your comment that the Bible is full of unscientific crap is A crapola statement.

Trapped Pentecostal · 07-20-2012, 03:22 PM

elfdream, I know that you weren't entirely serious, but here is a serious answer:

If one is going to demand that laws be based on the Bible, such as laws banning gay marriage, then there has to be a reason besides, "because the Bible says so."

That is the reason for this exercise. Bob M has claimed that we should have laws banning gay marriage because the Bible says it is unlawful, and the Bible is the ultimate authority. This naturally leads to the question of why anyone, particularly non-Christians (whether those non-Christians be Muslims, Hindus, agnostics, pagans, or atheists), should accept this assertion. We cannot create new laws simply because someone believes their holy book says to do so.

When believers go around wanting to change the laws that we all must live by, it is vitally important that everyone else doesn't just let them be. Their claims to some sort of authority on religious grounds must be cut down whenever possible. Otherwise, you get what we have today, which is the religious right trying to take others' rights away.

Bob M has failed to show that his arguments for laws based on the Bible's authority are valid. If he won't (or really can't) show that his claim of Biblical authority is true, then it can be disregarded.

FmrMarine · 07-20-2012, 03:47 PM

(07-20-2012 03:16 PM)Bob M Wrote:
(07-20-2012 03:08 PM)FmrMarine Wrote: I think what elicited the heavy-handed response was the comment by Bob that said the bible was the 100% final authority in the universe or something. That statement is a bit absurd since the bible is full of a lot of unscientific crap. And I don't think Bob is looking to stone women who weren't virgins on their wedding night as directed in the bible. He's probably not beating his slave, but not so bad as to kill the slave as is directed in the bible. And he probably doesn't have a problem interacting with a woman who happens to be on her period despite the fact that the bible says not to. The point being, despite the fact that Bob claims the bible to be the final authority for the universe, he probably disregards a lot of it, so the comment seemed a bit silly.

I have said this before, it has to be rightly interpreted, and the Bible represents itself as being two covenants. The old one was with Israel. The new one is with the church. And the rules that you regularly, consistently try to accuse Bible believers of ignoring are part of the old covenant. It is not an easy, simple delineation. There are moral imperatives that are basically restated or re-emphasized in the New Covenant, and others that were social or simply meant as establishing Israel as a people set apart from the other nations of the world. I do not have all the answers. I was a strict dispensationalist for many years, and having come out of that, I have been learning the emptiness of that system and trying to understand the relationship between the covenants. So I am not a perfect interpreter. But I am confident that the Bible is a final authority. God said it in the Old Testament and Jesus, who is God, re-emphasized it in similar words in the New Testament, that their words will last forever, even though the rest of the universe will pass away.

And your comment that the Bible is full of unscientific crap is A crapola statement.

Except for the fact that it is full of a lot of unscientific crap. What's also interesting, is that it lacks scientific knowledge. One would think if the bible were the final authority for the universe it would contain more concrete information about that universe. Yet it does not. In fact, it seems limited to the knowledge of the primitive men who wrote it. I always find it interesting that many Christians like to use the old vs. new convenant line. By that logic, I guess the 10 commandments are null and void as they were in the old covenant section.

greg · 07-20-2012, 04:16 PM

I'm just always amazed at the seeming lack of understanding of the founding of this fine country and God's role in it.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

John Adams