A believer hits the nail on the head

[Flaherty]

From the Dec 2 Tallahassee Democrat letters-to-the-editor:

Bible must not be read skeptically

Re: "True believers don't understand skeptics" (Letters, Nov. 26).

The letter writer's statement that true believers don't understand skeptics is not entirely true.

I was once a skeptic. Today, I'm a true believer. I once looked at the Bible as full of contradictions and fairy tales, written by humans to further a human agenda. The problem with my rendition of the Bible was that I was reading it and interpreting it through the eyes of a skeptic.

To understand the Bible, one must first accept Christ as savior and be indwelled with the Holy Spirit, which gives us the ability to understand the Bible. Skeptics state they've never seen evidence of biblical claims and beliefs outside of the Bible. I haven't either, but my faith in the inerrant word of God validates them nonetheless.

May I offer a suggestion for skeptics: Seek out a dialogue with true believers. It is my hope that once you do, you'll begin to understand the Christian faith. Accept Christ for who he is and begin to grow in Christian knowledge and faith.

CHARLES E. SOUTHER
souther51@hotmail.com

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/news/editorial/letters/7389248.htm


It's pretty sad these types of people are allowed to vote and drive cars.

[Yahweh]

I haven't either, but my faith in the inerrant word of God validates them nonetheless.
Plenty of people have just as much (if not more faith) in their own gods, why you dismiss so many other's gods is beyond me...

Worship the sun, pray to Joe Pesci...

[Zep]

He is using the same rationalisation as the people at the Creation Science organisations. Our friend Kent Hovind does too.

Isn't there a place somewhere you can put all these people so that they can preach to themselves and not be allowed get back out into the general populace?

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Flaherty
From the Dec 2 Tallahassee Democrat letters-to-the-editor:



It's pretty sad these types of people are allowed to vote and drive cars.

That guy wasn't a skeptic, he just read the confessions of St. Augustine and assumed the role of the author. The last time I had a conversation with true believers I realized they were all brain damaged or something and decided to become an evil atheist in order to avoid that fate. Actually, I didn't decide to become an atheist so much as they started calling me one, and I decided it wasn't worth the effort to tell them otherwise. Now I realize that true believers are not brain damaged, just close minded about their beliefs. They cling to their beliefs like barnacles to the bottom of a ship.

[arcticpenguin]

May I offer a suggestion for skeptics: Seek out a dialogue with true believers. It is my hope that once you do, you'll begin to understand the Christian faith.
I think he's got that much of it right. Brain damage is pretty easy to spot.

[Ratman_tf]

May I offer a suggestion for skeptics: Seek out a dialogue with true believers. It is my hope that once you do, you'll begin to understand the Christian faith. Accept Christ for who he is and begin to grow in Christian knowledge and faith.

Rather presumptious of him to presuppose that skeptics don't seek out 'true believers'. (how do you know a true believer, do they carry membership cards?) I've never been afraid to discuss religion with all types of believers. I've been friends with a borderline fundy baptist. (We had the most lovely arguments. :D )

[Filippo Lippi]

True believers? Stan Lee?

[Graham]

To understand the Bible, one must first accept Christ as savior and be indwelled with the Holy Spirit, which gives us the ability to understand the Bible.

indwelled???!

:confused:

[Mr Clingford]

Originally posted by c4ts

Now I realize that true believers are not brain damaged, just close minded about their beliefs. They cling to their beliefs like barnacles to the bottom of a ship.
Sounds like fundamentalism to me, whether of the religious or atheist variety as it seems to me that atheists may be as closed-minded as anybody else

[patoco12]

Originally posted by c4ts
They cling to their beliefs like barnacles to the bottom of a ship.
I can hardly blame anyone for this. My family defines itself partly by being Catholic. I tried to convince myself that I believed for the longest time. It's hard to let go.

[LFTKBS]

Originally posted by Graham


indwelled???!


Sometimes it's very impactful to be indwelled with the spirit.

[hgc]

To understand the Bible, one must first accept Christ as savior and be indwelled with the Holy Spirit, which gives us the ability to understand the Bible.Chicken & Egg problem. Which comes first? Read the bible to understand Christ, or accept Christ to understand the bible?

[Upchurch]

"indwell (http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=indwell)" is in the dictionary, but then, so is "'tis (http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=%27tis)".

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by hgc
Chicken & Egg problem. Which comes first? Read the bible to understand Christ, or accept Christ to understand the bible?

That's not the only problem. If you don't understand the Bible exactly as I do, then you obviously haven't really accepted Christ, and are being deceived by Satan...

I can't wait to be filled with the Holy Spirit and have all those contradictions, cruelties and absurdities disappear.. Will it ruin " Seinfeld " for me also?

[Dancing David]

Hmm,
Well that is very honest at least, they are admitting that you have to accept JC before the Bible will make sense, the problem I had was that i did accept JC, and I found that all of the OT and most of the NT were in disagreement with the teachings of JC.

At least it is an attempt to admit that the bible will not make sense to some of us, that is the beautey of somethings, honesty is free-ing.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally posted by Upchurch
"indwell (http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=indwell)" is in the dictionary, but then, so is "'tis (http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=%27tis)".

"Indwell" is a perfectly cromulent word. It totally embiggens the guy's point.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by Wile E. Coyote


"Indwell" is a perfectly cromulent word. It totally embiggens the guy's point.

This discussion has me thinking.. What would be a reasonable substitute for ' indwelled ' as in .. " Indwelled with the Holy Spirit. "?

Infected?

[Upchurch]

possessed?

[Professor Frink]

Originally posted by Diogenes


This discussion has me thinking.. What would be a reasonable substitute for ' indwelled ' as in .. " Indwelled with the Holy Spirit. "?

Infected?

If you're quoting the King James version, it's "indwelledeth."

[Lord Emsworth]

indoctrinated?

[Pyrts]

Infested?

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Pyrts
Infested?

Inebriated

[c4ts]

Originally posted by pgwenthold


Inebriated

I thought they weren't allowed to drink.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by c4ts


I thought they weren't allowed to drink.

Drunk on the holy spirit, dude.

[sparklecat]

Just not drinking to get drunk. Though certain sects don't allow drinking at all. And if your drinking will cause another person to be tempted to sin, then you shouldn't drink. In front of them at least.

*does not mention her own particular observance of those rules...*

[headscratcher4]

Originally posted by pgwenthold


Inebriated

Indochina?

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Mr Clingford
Sounds like fundamentalism to me, whether of the religious or atheist variety as it seems to me that atheists may be as closed-minded as anybody else
I've been saying this for a long time: Closemindedness has nothing to do with the specific belief, more about the character of the person.

[Chanileslie]

Originally posted by LFTKBS


Sometimes it's very impactful to be indwelled with the spirit.

Um, my question is do you at least get the benefit of lubricant???????:con2:

[Mr Clingford]

Originally posted by Yahweh

I've been saying this for a long time: Closemindedness has nothing to do with the specific belief, more about the character of the person. I have noted several people I have known that professed to be very strong Christians with strong black and white beliefs have become non-Christians with strong black and white beliefs

[c4ts]

I've read the NT, and if Jesus is to be belived, then I shouldn't belong to a particular church establishment.

[Mr Clingford]

Originally posted by c4ts
I've read the NT, and if Jesus is to be belived, then I shouldn't belong to a particular church establishment. Would you provide the verse in which he says that

[DarkPrimus]

What the person is saying is what I've been told by Christians dozens of times.

It can be boiled down to this:

"If you believe, then the Bible will become true."

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by DarkPrimus
What the person is saying is what I've been told by Christians dozens of times.

It can be boiled down to this:

"If you believe, then the Bible will become true."
The "Tinkerbell argument".

[DarkPrimus]

A new name for an old argument.

In the immortal words of Sarge:

"I like it. Got a ring to it."

[sparklecat]

Originally posted by DarkPrimus
What the person is saying is what I've been told by Christians dozens of times.

It can be boiled down to this:

"If you believe, then the Bible will become true."

It even works for a time... because, after all, its inspired by God. And so anything that doesn't make sense... you just can't understand it and the evidence will change anyway. Have faith my child.

Then one day it hits you that the evidence for the Bible's inspiration is suspiciously circular... and its all downhill from there...

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by sparklecat
Then one day it hits you that the evidence for the Bible's inspiration is suspiciously circular... and its all downhill from there...
The downhill starts long before that...


Imagine for a second you overheard a conversation I was telling to a friend I knew a gal who suddenly became a pillar of salt *thunk* just like that for looking at someone the wrong way. Then, with the power of my mind, I was controlling the ultimate destiny of the folk all around me, I also have telekenisis to manipulate spoons and stuff. At my very command, I could cause Griffons to materialize and attack my enemies -- and I HAVE. There is a castle that used to be held in the sky by Pixies, but it was eaten by octopus. The Octopus has since burrowed into the Earth and is swimming around the semi-liquid mantle -- IT COULD ERUPT OUT OF THE EARTH ANY MOMENT! BEWARE! (I could go on for hours more describing every insane paranormal/supernatural event I could think of...)

What your reaction be if that friend announced he believed every word I was saying?


The downhill begins at the literalization of the bible. SparkNotes.com - Old Testament (http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/oldtestament/) puts the genre of the bible into "Wisdom Literature" (SparkNotes also mentions a number of motifs and themes throughout the book). Hell, even Humptey Dumptey and Animal Farm (http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/animalfarm/) (which is actually an allegorical tale based on actual people and events) can be Wisdom Literature, no one in the right minds would ever fervently believe and defend the literal nature of the books (it wouldnt be hard to imagine a website which had satircally done that very same thing using the Lord of the Rings).

[sparklecat]

I agree :) I personally gave up that literal interpretation after seeing the circular nature though.

Twas an interesting time. My (now ex) fiance nearly broke up with me when I told him about my doubts regarding Scriptural inspiration.

Glad thats over.

[athon]

It's interesting to note that fundamentalists fall into two major categories -

There's the 'understand through Jesus Christ the Saviour TM ' group.

These people utilize catch phrases and well worn Xian terms to explain their argument. Unfortunately, I don't think they really understand what they are saying. Such terms as 'letting the Lord into your heart', and 'Christ the Redeemer of mankind' seem to answer all queries for them, as if a real argument isn't necessary, but a lot of 'amens' do the trick.

example: 'So why do you believe in some things in the bible, but can ignore other rules?'

'Because Christ the Redeemer who is our Saviour has been let into our hearts and has shown us the way.'

'Oh. Ok.'

Then there's the 'let's twist facts' group

These people have half the facts, and seem to be knowledgable, but then throw in a curve ball at the last second. They are rather 'dangerous', because they are often intelligent people who can use common logic to make the bible seem like a history book.

example: 'The great Flood dictated in the Bible has a great deal of evidence to have existed in reality...*insert facts here*'

Athon

[sparklecat]

Originally posted by athon
example: 'So why do you believe in some things in the bible, but can ignore other rules?'

*debates answering that one*

[athon]

Originally posted by sparklecat


*debates answering that one*

I must admit, this is one question I can never get an answer to, and ever since I was in high school I've wondered why you can use the OT to, say, damn homosexuality, but it's fine to wear clothes of mixed fabric, or erect a Xmas tree, or eat shellfish.

My point is, who makes the decisions on what is ' today's laws' and what is 'yesterday's laws'? Often I get the above jargon as an answer, which you can't discuss.

Athon

[sparklecat]

Really? How odd. Mmmkay, then I will attempt an answer :)

This would be a lot easier if I had a Bible around, but oh well...

There are a couple of different ways to judge which laws are meant for when. Obviously, if they're reiterated in the NT, thats one way to know. Beyond that...

1. There's a passage in Acts where God comes to Paul I think and tells him that all food is now ok to eat- no more restrictions on that.

2. There's another passage in Acts where the church leaders of the time got together to discuss Gentiles and their inclusion in the church- what laws were for them to follow and the like. The decision was to take out most of the regulations and stick to issues that were more of morality.

3. This one I can't go into very well, but there are passages talking about Christ being the fulfillment of the law, and Christians being under grace instead.

Christ said that the Law could be summed up as love God and love your neighbor, so I suppose anything that didn't fall under those wouldn't need to be followed, unless specifically stated to still apply.

Plus there are also some examples of Christ himself breaking certain laws and regulations, and referring to them as man's law rather than God's, but I'm not sure that any of those are things that we're told God said to do in the OT. Christ did break the Sabbath, but he said that he was master of the Sabbath, so thats a different matter.

Another could probably answer this one better... I'm really just a beginning student.

edit: Your example of homosexuality is one thats reiterated in the NT.

[Keneke]

Originally posted by Yahweh
(it wouldnt be hard to imagine a website which had satircally done that very same thing using the Lord of the Rings).

You know, maybe someone should do that. Cause Tolkien kind of meant it to be that way, with talk of Man inherting Middle Earth after the Third Age, as well as the gods curving the earth in on itself to hide from the world. It's a very sound mythology.

[athon]

Originally posted by sparklecat
Really? How odd. Mmmkay, then I will attempt an answer :)

This would be a lot easier if I had a Bible around, but oh well...


OK, good point. I so often hear refereces to Leviticus and Deuteronomy and Exodus, using their laws, that I often forget that Acts and the letters are commonly referred to as well.

Thanks,

Athon

[sparklecat]

No problem :)