"It's very difficult to have a sensible exchange with someone who doesn't read what a poster says and is constantly on the lookout for slurs, imaginary personal attacks, supposed threats to his beliefs and condescending style. Just itching to be offended by something or other."
Not at all mate
Thats your perception
Not looking for those things at all
You set the standard,i just follow your lead
Im not offended by you in the slightest,i just speak to you as you do me,or i percieve you do.
If you have genuine faith about certain beliefs then that's how it is
. If someone else questions them or even says they are rubbish, then so what.
Exactly,but dont not expect the same in return.
As i said,you set the the tone of the debate or conversation.
Dont now throw the toys out of the cot .
If you notice my replys to Whereu are a little different than yours atm,because im replying as the standard and tone he set.
"Why should that alter your faith."
It dosent 1 iota
Instead of telling me how you percieve i feel
Why not stick to the subject matter and express these opinions are what YOU Think or percieve. , and go from there,not just make sweeping statements made from your own assumptions of others.
If you use open ended communication
You will find the tone is more condusive to a discussion of ideas.
Whereu can be a master of these non combative technics when he so choses.
"Why not just address the actual material being discussed and putNot aside the victim mentality.
"Why do you "Blame" God for this unesassary cruel manner of death?
Clearly,the story line and your line of questioning assume alot of things that aernt there?"
I didn't blame anyone but put forward a quite plausible scenario based on what you said and generally accepted Christian beliefs about God, Jesus and his mission, with a query whether this was what you were suggesting.
What's the problem ?"
No problem
Your your own free agent,free opinion etc is part of the deal.
You frame some of your own assumptions as though you can just put a broad brush through what all christians accept as true.
To this point
I tried to point out there are 3 origins of christian thought and belief.
Three totally different concepts of God and belief.
Three totally different religions all calling themselves Christianity.
I found it interesting you asked questions
But didnt find any of the replys interesting enough to expand on any of them.
Which is ok
But just continue to make sweeping statements on beliefs others may not even hold.
"
Remember. , you have already stated neither me nor wotsup and correct anyway ,because its all a load of hogwash anyway"
There you go again viewing what was said in your own mirror which reflects only black and white."
Not at all
You made the statement
I commented on that comment
Imo its a closed black and white statement
I said so
"
Nothing about both being only incorrect, no hint that those views are hogwash.
This is the actual dialogue with wotsup.
Wotsop .."To send a son, you have to of had one prior to send, is the claim.
Prior existence, in no way needs to come into it."
Copper ...
"In my view FWIW, you are both right and both wrong because the truth is not one or the other.
That's why there are so many disagreements between those who grasp one end of the sick and insist the end they have is the only one."
"Can you show me where God killed his own son and was the one who actually carried this act out?"
No, can you show me evidence that He didn't ?
After all, isn't God omnipotent and omniscient and responsible for everything that happens in His Creation ?"
""Isaiah 45:7 King James Version (KJV)
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.""
Context is everything in the bible
This is no different than any piece of literature.
You can pull one paragraph out of say war and piece or a political speech etc,and frame words around a fraction of a broad subject.
And say there you go here it is.
The context of the above comment
is ultimately,the way the time and culture , things were written and conveyed at that time.
Was this.
God is the ultimate authority
The way this and other subjects when ,studied with all verses on a subject are put together,do you take the what appears to be grey areas which may add up to say 20% of the subject?
Or do you accept the 80% which is grey and conflicting in the said subject?
Unfortunately. , in most other forms of life and literature,this procedure is usually adopted.
But because of usually people own bias,they write the grey areas of a subject off in the bible.
God being the ultimate authority,because of free will and choices made by individuals.
Allowed evil to happen,because that was the road chosen.
It is written by the hebrew and jewish cultures this way.
God created evil,its written as though he did it.
But when all subject matter is put together on this subject,you will see 80% shows that infact it was a choice,God allowed this choice,and 20% of the verses are written that God did it.
Its a different time,different culture,different concepts than say our anglo culture.
We put our apply our understanding to another culture,and we sometimes miss the mark by doing that.
In say maori culture or aboriginal culture,we will look and understand,i woder what they meant by that,or why did they do that?
We apply it to things like that,but dont search and give the common decency of this using the eyes of another culture like the jews and the hebrews ,the understanding of how they wanted it to be understood.
""Also maybe ,if you can state you beliefs about what you believe about life its beggining and why we are here etc"
Why would I do that on a public forum ?"
Because firstly this is the religion and philosophy forum
That can be a subject not out of place on here.
And you wanted me to express my opinions,and led the conversation.
I just asked the same of you,when i percieved you attitude changed,so did mine.
I"'m not trying to convert or push people to accept what I may have come to."
The forum can be used as a tool of better understanding others perceptions.
Im sure that whereu dosent believe in God,but i also know because of this forum he better understands the conflict between the 3 forms.
I have witnessed it by his comments he understands the issue,and because of this,dosent tend to do a one size fits all approach to subjects as i percieve you do at times.
This sometimes makes me reply to you in the same tine,and clearly you dont like it.
This is why i usually never can hold a convo with db9
as he is the extreme of what im pointing out,hes only here for conflict and condescension of christians.
I reply in the like.
"L
et's leave the initiative to those who claim it's their duty to put their personal beliefs in the face of others"
Its actually a command of .jesus to preach and go to all nations with the gospel message.
"Besides, when I see your reaction to questioning of one of your cherished beliefs as below, it would be cruel to go any further without having something accessible to you, to replace them with."
Not at all
From my perspective i see alot of the things you say and portray from your world view like swiss cheese as well,full of holes,from our past convos.
To be honest its been a long time.
But i certainly dont remember all the semantics of it all,but im also happy to go there anytime again,it helps me to look at different angels to challenge others and my own perspective.
As im a work in progress
""The Son of God died for our sins. AKA "You surely will not die."
I'm not here to replace your faith or expect you to be able to explain why you believe what you do.
Having said that, unless that faith is a support for questioning, exploring and growth, then it is just a tomb.
"
Cant say i dissagree with that
But i also see your world view up for the same scrutiny as mine.
Most time non believers think its their right to continually lead the dance.
And like i see you were indignant about me wanting to apply the same rule of thumb to you,that you do to me.