Peanut Gallery for WalterP vs. Pittsburghjoe

[Hierophant]

2 minutes ago, WalterP said:

 

Hierophant,

 

You might not be 'feeding the troll' but you might inadvertently be giving Joe the audience and airtime he wants.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

I know what you mean, but I just have to hear this out. If everyone would prefer I move it to a private chat, I most definitely will.

[webmdave]

1 minute ago, Hierophant said:

 

I know what you mean, but I just have to hear this out. If everyone would prefer I move it to a private chat, I most definitely will.

 

I am interested in watching. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

@Hierophant, are you asking for a thread?

[Hierophant]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

@Hierophant, are you asking for a thread?

 

I started one in the theology section, because I am literally just asking questions of Joe's theology, I am not going to debate anything. I may want to debate once I have a much better understanding of where he is coming from, but not this moment.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

2 minutes ago, Hierophant said:

 

I started one in the theology section, because I am literally just asking questions of Joe's theology, I am not going to debate anything. I may want to debate once I have a much better understanding of where he is coming from, but not this moment.

Gotcha.  Any other takers here in The Den?

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Okay, folks, that show is over.  Would anybody else like a mano y mano with joe?  We'll go in a first-come-first-served basis.

I have no use in debating someone who refuses to support their supposed christian philosophy without quoting and supporting that philosophy with the Bible. I've heard enough, "I think " and "I believe" doctrines to last the rest of my life. So No. I do not wish to debate this idiot. 

 

DB

[TheRedneckProfessor]

8 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

I have no use in debating someone who refuses to support their supposed christian philosophy without quoting and supporting that philosophy with the Bible. I've heard enough, "I think " and "I believe" doctrines to last the rest of my life. So No. I do not wish to debate this idiot. 

 

DB

Can't say as I blame you DB.

[WalterP]

11 hours ago, Hierophant said:

 

I know what you mean, but I just have to hear this out. If everyone would prefer I move it to a private chat, I most definitely will.

 

Just out of curiousity, Hierophant... why?

 

Why do you HAVE to hear out someone who is beholden only to themselves when it comes to the interpretation and meaning of things in both the scientific the religious arenas ?

 

Surely you realize where that road leads to?

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

[webmdave]

8 minutes ago, WalterP said:

Surely you realize where that road leads to?

 

I don't. Would you care to enlighten me?

[WalterP]

1 minute ago, webmdave said:

 

I don't. Please tell me. 

 

Well, take your pick, Dave.

 

Disconnection from reality.  Irrationality.  The rejection of critical thinking.  A refusal to accept any logical contradictions in their worldview.  A tendency to reject societal and cultural norms that conflict with their divinely-appointed mission.  A refusal to be held accountable to anyone but themselves.  Grandiose claims to see the ultimate truth of reality.

 

Further down that road we find Howard Beal, the Mad Prophet of the Airwaves who claimed to have seen, "the revelation of ultimate clarity!"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Beale_(Network)

 

That enough?

[WalterP]

9 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

I have no use in debating someone who refuses to support their supposed christian philosophy without quoting and supporting that philosophy with the Bible. I've heard enough, "I think " and "I believe" doctrines to last the rest of my life. So No. I do not wish to debate this idiot. 

 

DB

 

I'm 100% with DarkBishop on this one.

 

As soon as anyone decides to make themselves the only authority they'll accept in secular (scientific) and religious matters, then all bets are off.  

 

When it comes to the Bible, the order of events matters.  The plagues of Egypt happened in a certain order and no amount of claiming that scripture is just a guide can change that order.  The tribes of Israel left Egypt before they went through the Red (or Reed) Sea, not after.  Jesus was resurrected after he died, not before.  The Holy Spirit was given to the disciples and the other followers after Jesus rose from the dead, not before.  Paul's missionary journeys took place in a certain order and no amount of saying 'the Bible is just a guide' can change that order.

 

If a so-called Christian chooses their own personal and private interpretation of scripture, even to the point of rejecting what scripture plainly says about past events, then they have placed themselves in a position of authority over the Word of God.

 

There's no reasoning with such a person because they have rejected reason.

 

I don't like to blow my own trumpet and say, 'I told you so!', but...

 

https://www.ex-christian.net/topic/84982-proof-v-proof/?tab=comments#comment-1234579

 

..I told you so.

 

"If you go down the road of asking Christians for reasons you won't find reason, you'll end up with un-reason.  That's because their beliefs are unreasonable."

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

[webmdave]

2 hours ago, WalterP said:

I'm 100% with DarkBishop on this one.

 

Then perhaps just ignoring the thread would be the best course of action. 

 

After two decades of running this site, one of my observations is that allowing fellow ex-Christians a wide latitude of freedom in their thinking can be particularly  challenging at times.

 

For instance, one might dogmatically believe visiting Christians are fair game and then verbally pounce like a lion. Another sincerely believes all visiting Christians should be treated gently in the hopes of de-converting them. These are only two examples of many dozens of differences between us. 

 

Here is where I am going: If differences in opinion between us (ex-Christians) cannot be accepted, we are in danger of reverting to an exclusive (dare I say "judgemental?") dogmatism similar to the one we all escaped. 

 

I am convinced that my approach when it comes to participating on this site is the best possible alternative ... for me. I am aware that others see things differently so expecting everyone to march lockstep with my opinions on the best way to interact with others would, I think, be a mistake. 

 

All I am saying is perhaps being true to outselves as individuals without compromise is great, so long as we refrain from requiring others to "see it my way." 

[WalterP]

3 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

Then perhaps just ignorimg the thread would be the best course of action. 

 

After two decades of running this site, one of my observations is that allowing fellow ex-Christians a wide latitude of freedom in their thinking can be particularly  challenging at times.

 

For instance, one might dogmatically believe visiting Christians are fair game and then verbally pounce like a lion. Another sincerely believes all visiting Christians should be treated gently in the hopes of de-converting them. These are only two examples of many dozens of differences between us. 

 

Here is where I am going: If differences in opinion between us (ex-Christians) cannot be accepted, we are in danger of reverting to a dogmatism similar to the one we all escaped. 

 

I am convinced that my approach when it comes to participating on this site is the best possible alternative ... for me. I am aware that others see things differently, and expecting everyone to march lockstep with my opinions on the best way to interact with others would, I think, be a mistake. 

 

All I am saying is perhaps being true to outselves as individuals without compromise is great, so long as we refrain from requiring others to "see it my way." 

 

I'll be ignoring Joe, that's for sure.

[WalterP]

 

 

For those Christians who do accept the Bible as historical and not just a guide that can be interpreted on a whim, the above should happen.

 

The egg represents the faith of a Bible-believing Christian.  The jaws of the vice represent what scripture actually says.  Logic is the force that turns the screw, applying force to the irrational faith of the Christian, gradually cracking it and then ultimately crushing it.

 

As we have recently seen, the order in which events occurred in the garden of Eden reveal a foundational flaw in the entire basis of the Christian belief system.

 

God withheld the knowledge of good and evil from Adam and Eve, sequestering that knowledge in the flesh of the fruit of the forbidden tree.  They were deprived of any means of making a reasoned judgement of the merits of good over evil.  Yet, they were cursed and punished by god for supposedly 'choosing 'evil over good.  Later on, god give the game away by announcing that they had NOW become like him, knowing both good and evil.

 

Logic tells us that Adam and Eve were entrapped into a no-win scenario by god.  Christians who realize this then usually fall back to the, 'they should have obeyed' position.  But this is no real help because then they are depriving Adam and Eve of their free will, making them into unthinking automatons who should have obeyed god's command without understanding it.

 

Christians can't have it both ways.

 

Either god is an all-powerful monster who abuses the weak and vulnerable OR he's an all-powerful monster who doesn't want free-willed children, but robotic slaves.  There's no wiggle room here.  However, there are a few ways Christians can avoid having their faith crushed between the jaws of logic and scripture.  They can do as PittsburghJoe does and have a faith that flows like water, unable to be pinned down to any specifics.  Or they can do as Edgarcito did and decline to put their faith into the jaws at all.  

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

[TABA]

Well said Dave.  Even as I agree with Walter in most respects.  Different Strokes.  
 

I do admire @Hierophant’s tenacity and patience in engaging with Joe.  It’s more than I could do. 

[TABA]

I will say that the main secret of Christianity’s success is that it can be all things to all people.  You can make out of it whatever you want.  Don’t have to be true.  Don’t have to be real. Don’t have to make sense. 

[Hierophant]

Walter - I know what you are getting at. I am going somewhere with my line of questioning, i.e., down the road, I am going to press Joe on certain points, but before I get there, I want to make sure I have a good idea of what he is trying to argue and try to see how he is thinking about his theology. I have noticed over the years that if I do not define terms and concepts before debating them, then frequently I end up talking right past someone. I have done a lot of studying of Christianity so I am familiar with sects, beliefs, esoteric language, and I might have a definition of a term or principle I am used to because of my background that others do not.

[Joshpantera]

42 minutes ago, TABA said:

I will say that the main secret of Christianity’s success is that it can be all things to all people.  You can make out of it whatever you want.  Don’t have to be true.  Don’t have to be real. Don’t have to make sense. 

 

That's exactly right. There's evidence all around to back that up. 30,000 something denominations back that up. 

 

So these discussions with Joe outline how that sort of thing can get started. He looks at the bible as "just a guide," and pretends that it reads any which way he'd like. Frustrating to try and debate against for sure. Because he won't acknowledge it when he's shown to be in error. I think that the error's of Joe's logic have been outlined well for readers, though. That's the best that Walter or any of us can do with someone like this. 

 

48 minutes ago, WalterP said:

Christians can't have it both ways.

 

Either god is an all-powerful monster who abuses the weak and vulnerable OR he's an all-powerful monster who doesn't want free-willed children, but robotic slaves.  There's no wiggle room here.  However, there are a few ways Christians can avoid having their faith crushed between the jaws of logic and scripture.  They can do as PittsburghJoe does and have a faith that flows like water, unable to be pinned down to any specifics.  Or they can do as Edgarcito did and decline to put their faith into the jaws at all.  

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

Maybe this discussion teased out the fact that the "gods" wanted something like a robot more so than a truly free willed being. Joe couldn't deal with it. And maybe someone will read along realize that "faith that flows like water" is an unflattering position to find oneself in. And how embarrassing a position to be caught and called out on. 

 

No doubt another apologist will pop up again soon with some entirely different interpretation that he want's to go into battle with us with, or try and convert us back to christianity with. They never stop coming and each one has different type of personal belief and apologetic's...

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

To Walter's concluding point, though, even in a guide, the order of things is important, as anyone who has ever disobeyed the Ikea instruction booklet can attest.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Is their going to be a new peanut gallery for Hierophants thread? 

[TABA]

3 hours ago, Hierophant said:

I am going to press Joe on certain points, but before I get there, I want to make sure I have a good idea of what he is trying to argue and try to see how he is thinking about his theology.

Well I think Joe’s last response to @Hierophant is more enlightening than just about anything he’s said the whole time he’s been here: he is receiving special revelation from the Holy Spirit and that’s it.  You may be surprised to hear that he has not moved me to return to Christianity.  The Holy Spirit seeks to have chosen an especially incompetent messenger.  
 

Thanks for teasing this out, Hierophant!

 

 

[Hierophant]

Joe wants a round with me in the Lion's Den. @TheRedneckProfessor, if you would be so kind as to open a thread for us.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

@Hierophant,

 

It would be interesting to see what Joe believes happens to the believer after accepting Jesus according to his wave theology. What happens during the salvation experience, and why we do not turn back into coherent waves at that time. 

 

DB

[TABA]

3 minutes ago, Hierophant said:

Joe wants a round with me in the Lion's Den. @TheRedneckProfessor, if you would be so kind as to open a thread for us.

I just started it.  Evidently you don’t have to be an Exalted Super Moderator like the Prof to do that...

[Hierophant]

Ahhh, thank you @TABA