Prof. Tor Coolguy wrote:
I see it as this Mr. Poopsmith. Let's say that all people following the teachings of christ are all chained to a big 'ol sharp 'ol nasy 'ol rock.
And people are trying to save them,some people get off the rock and are able to live a life knowing that they will never have to strapped to that rock ever again that's my view of being saved,if you are saved you needn't worry what is going to happen to you tommorow because whatever it is it's God's will and you can't do anything about but roll with the punches and count your blessings whenever things get rough and you wonder why you are still existing anyway. And the people that kick and spit at the people that are trying to save them and going to stay on that rock forever even when your corporeal body has crapped out.
That's a good analogy, Mr. The-Cheat-and-Strong-Mad-and-Strong-Bad-Playing-Trogdor, but it doesn't do much to explain why a god of eternal love unto us would leave anyone strapped to the rock.
furrykef wrote:
Not if they take it the wrong way. And being direct in such discussions is, unfortunately, a sure way of being taken the wrong way.
I don't assume that in a rational debate, people will take things the wrong way (it seems that some have). If they do, all I can do is explain myself and apologise for any offence caused.
Didymus wrote:
I may be too lazy in not going back and reading the whole thread again, but I'm curious to know what hole he's talking about.
It was where I asked Fahooglewitz what grounds he had to believe that the Bible was truth.
Quote:
It may be that what looks like a hole to him doesn't look anything like a hole to us. Who sets the rules on what constitutes a hole and how it should be handled?
Well, for me, the bottom line is: if it doesn't make sense to me, I treat it as a hole. You're absolutely right in saying that I might be the one who's wrong; that's why I give the opposing party the chance to explain it. If it turn out to have misjudged the alleged hole, I concede.
AgentSeeThroo wrote:
Also, something may seem like a hole to a person who doesn't hold the same beliefs, but it's usually just a space not filled in their mind due to ignorance.
Never assume you know everything about another person's religion.
My belief is my life, and I study and live it every day. I learn new principles and concepts simply by living. Due to this, my knowledge of Christ and his teachings are always increasing. If you don't study and learn about something every day, how can you know more about it than someone who does.
In the same vein, I would never try to throw "holes" that I may see in someone's belief in their face because I probably wouldn't have the same amount of knowledge that they would.
Finally, if you're trying to show someone that your "way" is the best way, then exposing holes and being self-righteous isn't gonna win any converts, it's just gonna make people get ticked off. You should let your life be a ministry. God is not a god of condemnation, but salvation.
I think I've caused a bit of a misunderstanding here. How was I acting self-righteous? All I said was "But surely exposing a hole in the reasoning to justify their belief is just as effective and cuts out the middleman". It was just a comment about debate tactics (and, I note, no-one jumped on Kef for talking about the very same thing in the first place). As I said, you're correct in saying that what I perceive to be a hole may, in fact, be fully supported by a good argument, but I'm never going to find out if that's the case if I don't bring it up, and until it's explained, I treat it as a hole.
And if exposing holes in another's argument isn't going to win any converts, what do you suggest?
Log in
Wiki
FAQ
Search
)
at the Jefferson Barracks VA Medical Center, where I worked mostly with recovering addicts. Starting next quarter, I'll be at Lutheran Senior Services, Laclede Groves Assisted Living Center.
