A Question for S.T.Ranger
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 4 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-06-2012, 02:39 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(04-06-2012 12:58 AM)Jedah Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 06:27 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Besides the "spouting behaviors" thingy, it might be interesting to have a discussion about "elitism" here, as it's been rasied in this context. It makes American's VERY uncomfortable. I don't see a way around it . (?)

In my country, some poorly educated "celebrities" constantly appeal to their own ignorance in argument as if it's a certificate to make bad argument sound. I was amazed to see the same situation here Shocking .

Hello master jedah, I would have to disagree with this assessment as it has not been my own ignorance that has been brought into focus. While I do not claim to actually be all that intelligent, I would say that as of yset the score is...

Antagonists: no answers;

STRanger: every question answered or at least dealt with as best as can be managed due to poor phraseology.

lol

(04-06-2012 12:58 AM)Jedah Wrote:  There is nothing wrong being dropped out from high school, but it's also not a Medal of Honor or some sort of fallacy-free Adamantine shield. I see no reason a person contantly mentioned such irrelevant & private factor in an (should be) objective academic discussion.

Me either. Certainly have to question why it would be thought that not finishing high school would put one at a disadvantage. Also would have to question those that feel it necessary to attack rather than simply deal with the issues.

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 03:57 PM (This post was last modified: 07-06-2012 04:40 PM by S.T. Ranger.)
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  From Wikipedia:

"Biblical literalism (also called Biblicism, Biblical fundamentalism or Biblical_inerrancy) is the interpretation or translation of the explicit and primary sense of words in the Bible.[1][2]

While there is a bit here we can see that is true, there is much in this post worth considering. Starting with this: the wikipedian definition takes far too much and seek s to wrap it up into one ball/ THe vast differences between the theologies of those that call themselves "fundamental" and take pride in a literal view, not to mention the individual adherents to those groups, makes it impossible for this definition to fit them all.

One question I would ask is whether you actually gave any thought to this resource?

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  A literal Biblical interpretation is associated with the fundamentalist and evangelicalhermeneutical approach to scripture—


And this is true. Proper interpretational methods are employed by those that seek to understand God's word. However, most would confess ( or perhaps claim) that they follow methods that are generally accepted.

But we will the see the reverse of theia approach in a bit.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  the historical-grammatical method—and is used extensively by conservative Christians[3],


Notice the word "extensively," and understand this is not synonmous with "exclusively." Nor would we say that all that call themselves "literalists" could actually carry that title without question.

Which also leads us to examine the definition which has been provided, and recognize that it speaks of elements that in truth show the very literalism that is sought to be attached to the definition...is impossible. And I hope to explain that as we go.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  in contrast to the historical-critical method of liberal Christians. The essence of this approach focuses upon the author's intent as the primary meaning of the text.


This is a questionable portion of the definition, for it relies upon almost an insistance that one must either be historico-grammatial in their approach, or...they must employ the historical-critical branch.

But there is no need to divorce the two for fear that a proper interpretation can be reached. These are simply areas with the framework of study itself...not two separate branches that are made out to be exclusive clubs.

Notice the article says: "The essence of this approach focuses upon the author's intent as the primary meaning of the text."

This is what all that take this effort seriously seek after.


(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  [4] Literal interpretation does place emphasis upon the referential aspect of the words or terms in the text. It does not, however, mean a complete denial of literary aspects, genre, or figures of speech within the text (e.g., parable, allegory, simile, or metaphor).

This is important to understand about someone that is literal in their approach.

Though...I would contend as to whether scripture contains allegory.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  [5] Also literalism does not necessarily lead to total and complete agreement upon one single interpretation for any given passage."


This is also true, however, it again points to the obvious fact that not all is equal among theologians.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You, ST, are a Biblical literalist.


It would be better to know what I am before making assumptions. While I do consider my a literalist, you have not discussed the Bible with me to be able to make a reasoned or informed conclusion.

As I have said since coming here, be glad to discuss that with you.


(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  In my opinion


Well, I am used to that. As well as the opinions of those you quote. I just wonder if you have given any real thought to the heart that lies behind the following charges:

[ Blink quote='Mark Fulton' pid='122002' dateline='1338802839']
you are therefore one of the vulgar crowd,

the cattle class,

the hoi-polloi,

the pseudo-intellectual, the unstudied,

the stupid consumer at the end of the line.
[/quote]


You know this about me? Of course, I know how important it is to some that any kind of threat be quelled, no matter the tactics employed.

Would life be over, if it were to be brought into focus that...well, you can think about that.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  People like you are a dime a dozen, and most of you think you have a superior understanding of scripture.


I don't just think I have a superior understanding of scripture...you constantly prove this. You challenged me, remember?

lol

Now, the chosen subject is boring?

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Yet you are there to be taken advantage of, and you have been for hundreds, no, thousands, of years.


And who exactly is taking advantage of me? Can you answer that question, at least? So many charges, assumptions, but, when called to validate the statments made, it is always avoided, answered with name-calling. Whiel such diversion may work on others, I will continue to respond to these charges.

So, Mark...who is taking advantage of me?

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Most of the people, in fact I would say probably all, on this forum, are primarily interested in the historical-critical method of investigating Christian dogma.


Most of the people, and make no mistake I mean most, have no association with anything that would even closely resemble knowedge of Christianity.

That is repeatedly made clear. You boast 10,000hours of study, yet are clueless to even a basic knowledge such as the New Covenant.

Of course, this is understandable because if there is 10,000 hours logged, it is clear that it is not study of the Bible, but study of what is taught about the Bble, and there is a big difference.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  All of us have risen above the cattle class mentality some of us were born into.


I have no opinion concerning one's intellect nor the conditions surrounding their circumstances, past or present. Just no a relevant factor.

One thing I learned early in life is that I can learn from anyone, despite their status in life. That is a good lesson to learn.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Most of us are humanists.


perhaps. Though I believe there are humanists that are separate from a religious mentality.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  It bothers us that people like yourself are being used,


Again...who is using me?

I recall someone saying I was a lone ranger, so tell me how it is possible I can be both?

lol



(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  because we are very aware that the whole system is rotten to the core and stinks with intellectual, political and economic corruption.


While I will admit that many here may have had bad experiences with both "Churches" as well as "Christians," what I cannot seem to get through to you is one simple basic truth: you just do not know enough about the Church (the body of Christ) nor Christian Doctrine to have a valid opinion.

Your opinion is worth about as much as those that approach atheists as idiots, when there are a number of factors that have to be examined on an individual basis, such as the circumstances and conditions surrounding their exposure to Christianity.

And that opinion is worthless. It is nothing more than assumption, seeking to put everyone in the same wrapper.

I will agree that the religious "system" is indeed guilty of the charges above, but, again, you speak of that which not only do you not know, you could not possibly know.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  We refuse to believe bullshit, because it has been debunked, many many times,


Could at least one example of this be produced?

As far as what you believe, that has been made clear: what others tell you is truth. But you are being dishonest by claiming that the opinions of historians and archaeologists prove anything. What is more...you are not the one that did the work. So you are forced to repeat the findings of someone else, brand it as truth, and preach as best you can.

And to be honest, Mark, you are not doing a very good job of it.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  and we have a healthy pride in our own intellects.


This is true. But those that trust in intellect have to admit that they also trust in the intellect of others, and the latter is usually going to be the case.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Many people here have devoted much effort to rehabilitate you,


Of course, it has been heart-warming. Oh the compassion, oh the concern...lol.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  yet instead of investigating their ideas you throw dirt in their faces,


What you don't understand is this: many of the "ideas" have been investigated long before I came here. I doubt that among you there is one more skeptical than yours truly.

What you mean to say is that if I do not embrace your particular beliefs, which have their foundation completely apart from the Bible, then, you will simply claim the superior position without any kind of validation of that foundation.

It would help if you would cease with claims of superiority in a Book you are unfamiliar with.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  and you get all paranoid when you are nailed in your own petty foolishness.


Could you show me an example of paranoia?

Could you show me where you have actually made a valid point, much less..."nailed me in my own petty foolishness?'

This is good stuff...really.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  If you continue to adamantly refuse to lift yourself above your bottom dwelling status, do not expect to be taken seriously here.


I don't know, Mark, I get the impression that you take me very seriously. Might just be me, though.

As far as my status, again, you just do not know enough about me to make an informed decision, though, that is the way the liberal mind works, so, you are slightly disadvantaged from a realistic point of view.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I, for one, dislike seeing people degrade themselves.


Somehow I doubt that very much.

(04-06-2012 03:40 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  And it is very tedious having a discussion moving forward only to have it dragged into the gutter by your fragrantly ignorant commentary.


What discussion? Shall I remind you once more you asked me to choose a topic that you might express your prowess concerning the Bible?

Backfired a wee bit on you didn't it? When you would like to actually have a discussion...let me know. You choose the doctrine. You say the "whole system" is corrupt, how about discussing what is corrupt about it? It may be we may be in agreement on much of it, but who knows until we actually discuss it?

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 04:26 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
yea... no one will read this because you are missing the " [ " in front of Mark's quote.
Try and use the source tab ST, it's a bit easier to view and preview posts. Thumbsup

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 04:27 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 05:42 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  I will treat this as a serious question(s), GM:


Why would one...not want to?

I can tell you why (one would not want): because they hate the life they have now. Many people will commit suicide this year because of that. And that...is tragic.

No, that's not it. The knowledge of my temporariness is precisely what keeps me alive. It's what makes me want to suck the marrow out of every fuckin' incredible moment.

That is how many view life, believer and non-believer alike.



(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  There is no meaning to be found in the eternal.

For you, perhaps, but most of the population, including atheists, have some sort of perspective on what is eternal. either one believes that the universe "just happened, meaning that something came from nothing, or, they are forced to say that the universe is eternal.

And some have this as a foundational principle in their belief system.

What do you say? And what value do you ascribe to that belief, no matter which one it is?

(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Hell, there's no meaning at all except for that which is artificial and transient.

So you are okay with politicians? lol

(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 05:42 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  As for me, I have no question about life after death, and this is result of what is taught in scripture, and what I base my beliefs on.

From the deaths I've observed of devout Christians, that blind faith will be of little consolation on your deathbed.

It is funny you should mention that. I have seen that among Christians, while there is certainly grief, the norm is that they deal better with it than those that believe they have lost their loved ones...forever.

But on a different matter, why is it that a Christian can be said to have blind faith? The peace which many believers (not all) have concerning death and the "afterlife" is not based upon simply being told there is a heaven for Christians, but is a true peace which perhaps you yourself have, though for different reasons.

It isn't something that money can buy.
(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  That's a bit late to realize the truth for my taste is all. ... But to each his own.

You mean that if you die and wink out then you realize that you winked out?

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 04:29 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(07-06-2012 04:26 PM)kim Wrote:  yea... no one will read this because you are missing the " [ " in front of Mark's quote.
Try and use the source tab ST, it's a bit easier to view and preview posts. Thumbsup


I will look for it. Thanks.

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 04:32 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(07-06-2012 04:26 PM)kim Wrote:  yea... no one will read this because you are missing the " [ " in front of Mark's quote.
Try and use the source tab ST, it's a bit easier to view and preview posts. Thumbsup
lol...thanks again. I would have caught it when I finished with the responses.
Just make sure you don't read it...lol.
GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 05:15 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  [ST...please try not to take it personally.

Believe me...I don't. You see, I stopped taking myself so serious quite a while ago. The content of your posts, Mark...are expected.

That is why it is such a joy when I do find someone that is willing to discuss the issues. When you figure that out, you may be led to change your approach. I remember the first few posts you did, and I was really hopeful that a serious disccussion would ensue. But, it was not to be...pity.

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You are a nice guy. But you are sprouting jibberish. Biblical literalism Drooling is yesterday's news.

Okay, I am a little tired so I will resist a joke about "sprouting," though it is there for the discerning mind.

This again is a statment that is supposed to carry with it some modicum of authority, yet, reveals the absolute lack of understanding concerning the Bible and interpretational methods.

Shall we say there was no literal Rome?

Shall we say there was no literal sun? Perhaps this was simply metaphorical?

Can you see with this example how a "literal" application of literal in regards to Bible interpretation is...literally impossible?

lol

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Period. Many people have gently tried to tell you, and you just don't get it. Hence my very direct words.

If this is "gently"...I would sure hate to see slightly perturbed.

lol

Of course, as I have said before, we gotta have a few laughs along the way. Interpretational skills concerning posts requires the abiblity to discern humor, also. Though, I will give you this: my sense of humor may be more difficult to discern than most...lol.

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  If you become more receptive to what people are telling you, the conversation will be more cordial.

Again it is a direct statement of control. It is thought that it is a balanced discussion if only one side "receives."

"If you embrace what we say, read what we read, believe those we believe in...we'll be nice to you."

Heads up, Mark, making friends is not my concern. I am fully aware that many here are going to be antagonistic based upon one thing: my declaration of my faith in Christ and His word.

Okay, that's two, but again...sense of humor there, bud.

lol

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  If you stop endlessly repeating yourself, you will get more respect.

Respect is also not my concern. I am not here to make a name for myself, simply to attempt a few of you to actually consider the basis of your beliefs. Most, if not all, will be shown to be empty, opinions based upon the works of other (which are also mainly opinion), and theories.

If you like, I will go through the most recent conversations and make a list of unanswered questions, points, and issues which have not been dealt with.

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I suspect you think you haven't been listened to, or understood.

You suspect? lol

Are you going to say that you have honestly looked at what has been discussed?

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I think you have been granted more than a fair go.

Perhaps by the moderators. It is in their power to ban me, and if this is their decision, I can live with that.

But as far as you go, I have said, "If you don't want to talk with me...don't."

You have that power, Mark. But I suspect (lol) that you have a hard time dealing with those that do not agree with you, and have a need for the last word. I also suspect that it is important to you what your fellows here think. For this reason, you cannot maintain a neutral position with one you do your best to minimalize first in your own mind and then in the eyes of others.

How is that working out for you, Mark?

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Realise that most of us have heard arguments like yours about the validity of scripture ad nauseum,
I disagree. First...there have been no arguments concerning scripture. To say in effect "The guys I have read attest that Paul usurped true Christianity and then added a bunch of doctrine that is not compatible to the revelation of the Old Testament" is not a serious look at Christian Doctrine. It is simply the expression of faith which results from some pretty shoddy research, fueled by a proclivity to embrace only what suits your doctrine.

Secondly, I have looked at the teaching concerning scripture on this forum, both in other threads as well as a little bit in some of the discussions.

I would mention that, if the posts have not been altered as I found upon my return here (which is in itself a damning testimony to someone's integrity, if in fact someone did alter the post and it was not something external to the site [and I am willing to grant that possibility and let it go]) I would encourage anyone to look at my original visit and the conversations that followed.

At one point you did at least attempt to include the actual scriptures in a discussion that heavily depends upon scripture and what they contain.

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  and we point blank refuse to get drawn in.

That's okay, I understand that. Sometimes the heart can get hardened, and most attempts to examine that ccondition is fruitless.

(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  So there is no point repeating them. Nobody will take the bait.

Well, that may be, but...you don't have to catch fish to enjoy fishing.

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 05:25 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(04-06-2012 11:14 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insight
see 1.1.1

Does it help that I am a Sherlock Holmes fan?

lol

(04-06-2012 11:43 PM)Jedah Wrote:  
(04-06-2012 11:11 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I'm sure some may think i sound arrogant and nasty towards ST, and they may have a point.


Well, bro
I am the one truly being nasty to ST. I admit that I did some personal attacks that you guys just too kind to inform me not to. I am never a believer of Matthew 5:39 ...

I would be curious as to why not?

(06-06-2012 07:08 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(05-06-2012 12:50 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Jeebus! you're feeling guilty too! I can't remember you being too harsh.

I wonder where ST's gone? Sulking?



I guess he finally "had to go".

I mean, he only said it at the end of each post.

Not sulking, lol, I have a business to run.

And I will, as it seems to bother some, try to keep in mind that I should not say that I am going.

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2012, 11:06 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(07-06-2012 02:39 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(04-06-2012 12:58 AM)Jedah Wrote:  In my country, some poorly educated "celebrities" constantly appeal to their own ignorance in argument as if it's a certificate to make bad argument sound. I was amazed to see the same situation here Shocking .

Hello master jedah, I would have to disagree with this assessment as it has not been my own ignorance that has been brought into focus. While I do not claim to actually be all that intelligent, I would say that as of yset the score is...

Antagonists: no answers;

STRanger: every question answered or at least dealt with as best as can be managed due to poor phraseology.

lol

(04-06-2012 12:58 AM)Jedah Wrote:  There is nothing wrong being dropped out from high school, but it's also not a Medal of Honor or some sort of fallacy-free Adamantine shield. I see no reason a person contantly mentioned such irrelevant & private factor in an (should be) objective academic discussion.

Me either. Certainly have to question why it would be thought that not finishing high school would put one at a disadvantage. Also would have to question those that feel it necessary to attack rather than simply deal with the issues.

GTY

Serious, man...
Your sense is just like this hawt lady



Oh, BTW... Since your intelligence can only comprehend Hollywood popcorn movies, I will kindly inform you : my name has nothing to do with stupid Jedi, Mr. High school drop-out, get it?

Sry other people here. I simply return his 嘴砲 with 嘴砲.

Life is too important to be taken seriously.
- Oscar Wilde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jedah's post
08-06-2012, 08:38 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2012 08:54 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(07-06-2012 04:27 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  There is no meaning to be found in the eternal.

For you, perhaps, but most of the population, including atheists, have some sort of perspective on what is eternal.

Do you now. Tell me what's it like.

(07-06-2012 04:27 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  .... either one believes that the universe "just happened, meaning that something came from nothing, or, they are forced to say that the universe is eternal.

You might be too restrictive in your options. Wink

(07-06-2012 04:27 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  And some have this as a foundational principle in their belief system.

What do you say? And what value do you ascribe to that belief, no matter which one it is?

I respect it. All the way to the point where it starts to infringe upon and borders on presuming to dictate my own personal metaphysics.


(07-06-2012 04:27 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  From the deaths I've observed of devout Christians, that blind faith will be of little consolation on your deathbed.

It is funny you should mention that. I have seen that among Christians, while there is certainly grief, the norm is that they deal better with it than those that believe they have lost their loved ones...forever.

Goddam Ranger, I wasn't talking about the ones left behind. I was talking about the ones doing the dying.

(07-06-2012 04:27 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(04-06-2012 06:32 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  That's a bit late to realize the truth for my taste is all. ... But to each his own.

You mean that if you die and wink out then you realize that you winked out?

Nope. I mean it's better to realize you're just gonna eventually wink out sooner rather than later.

P.S. This is a good discussion. Gonna have to rep Ranger.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: