Greeting from a Christian
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-02-2013, 03:10 PM
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 03:05 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(27-02-2013 01:50 PM)DarthMarth Wrote:  GirlyMan: That is an awesome misspelling of my name, but the real one is better. It was inspired by Marth with a Beam Sword in SSBM.

Pffft, it's just something I do dude. ... I mean for my own amusement and shit. Tongue
I can identify with that. I amuse myself while playing Dominion by mispronouncing the names of the cards. I think I've convinced a few of my friends that "Duchy" is pronounced "duckie".

"Know that we own minds that could devour the sun/And what we've done will remain although it's gone" - Scar Symmetry
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DarthMarth's post
27-02-2013, 03:16 PM
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 03:10 PM)DarthMarth Wrote:  
(27-02-2013 03:05 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Pffft, it's just something I do dude. ... I mean for my own amusement and shit. Tongue
I can identify with that. I amuse myself while playing Dominion by mispronouncing the names of the cards. I think I've convinced a few of my friends that "Duchy" is pronounced "duckie".

Not sure, but think you might be looking for this Wink :



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
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
27-02-2013, 03:28 PM
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 03:16 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Not sure, but think you might be looking for this Wink :


I'd recommend using the following guy's tutorials instead. They are far more accurate. Angel



[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vosur's post
27-02-2013, 03:39 PM (This post was last modified: 27-02-2013 03:44 PM by Vosur.)
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 02:45 PM)DarthMarth Wrote:  Perhaps a similar reason to some of the critiques I read of the "Christian" values in the Bible in Godless. For some, like the violence in the Old Testament, it's natural for a modern reader to be shocked. For other virtues, like the emphasis on, say, poverty or humility, it seemed like Barker was mostly expressing personal dissatisfaction or disagreement with them as ethics; they don't conform to his definition of what it means to live a "good" life. I guess I'm the opposite, then. Though I won't force it on others, I genuinely prefer, say, giving away a large portion of my income (which I can spare from being a software engineer) rather than keeping it for myself. Basically, I've internalized the moral teachings of Christianity, whereas Barker seems to have internalized a different morality that is not compatible with them. And you will tend to prefer living according with whatever morality you have internalized. (This is probably an incomplete response)
I'm going to go ahead and ask you for clarification just to make sure that I don't misunderstand you. Do you prefer being a Christian because you can identify with its moral teachings (far) more than with those of alternative ideologies and religions?

(27-02-2013 02:45 PM)DarthMarth Wrote:  You might be onto something with your "third option". Part of the reason I joined is because I'm wondering if theists and atheists have different epistemologies (philosophies of knowledge and truth), with the skeptical one placing a high emphasis on evidence and proof as the basis for knowledge. For me, I'm not sure the skeptical model of "weigh the evidence for and against a claim before believing anything" as if you were in a court room is universally applicable. I've heard arguments that the alternative to this model is just believing whatever you want (Barker wrote "With faith, anything goes"), but this seems like the same kind of reasoning that leads fundamentalists to demand Biblical literalism because without it, "you can interpret the Bible however you want". There is also a definite feedback effect where your starting point (which is never really neutral) affects how you interpret the available evidence.
The skeptical model that you have mentioned sums up my view most splendidly.

How would you describe yours?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
27-02-2013, 03:52 PM (This post was last modified: 27-02-2013 04:07 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 03:39 PM)Vosur Wrote:  The skeptical model that you have mentioned sums up my view most splendidly. ... How would you describe yours?
Pretty much the same as you, brother. Wink

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
27-02-2013, 03:53 PM
RE: Greeting from a Christian
Welcome!
No test questions here, just welcome to TTA.

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
27-02-2013, 04:46 PM
Greeting from a Christian
Welcome to the forums, DarthMarth. I'm in software QA...and thus your sworn enemy! I shall be scrutinizing your output with great zeal!

Also, "Hi!"

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 04:50 PM
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 01:50 PM)DarthMarth Wrote:  Well, I see I had nothing to worry about. Thanks for the warm welcome. Smile Kind of a lot of questions, but I'll do my best.
Phaedrus:
1. I attend an evangelical free church ("free" meaning there is no external body or organization that controls us, just our members). Though I do feel at home there, I don't identify too strongly with that denomination or any, or feel bound to agree with them on everything.
2. Hell: Yes, but I think the common conception of hell as a place of "eternal, conscious torture" held by many Christians (and atheists) is misleading at best, harmful at worst. Original sin: In the sense of people being innately sinful, yes. In the sense of Adam somehow being the source of this inherited tendency, no. Vicarious redemption: Not too familiar with the phrase, but I think so.
3. Just studied the book of James a few weeks ago, which basically says you need good works to be "saved". My view on this is similar to that of other Protestants in that good works are the proof and inevitable result of having faith that saves.
4. Science: The best and most useful (you could argue only) way we have of learning truth about the natural universe.
5. Big bang: Yes. Abiogenesis: Still hard to believe, but presumably it happened one way or another. It's incredibly unlikely that inorganic molecules would "happen" to assemble themselves into self-reproducing matter, but then there are a lot of other incredibly unlikely things that led to us being here. Evolution: Yes.

Chas: No, just Godless and Deconverted. No offense, but because of the tone (especially that of Dawkins' introduction to Godless) they aren't exactly fun reading for a Christian. Is there any particular reason I should look into them as well? (Godless seemed fairly comprehensive)

kingschosen:
1. I have done a lot of thinking on Calvinism vs. Arminianism and I don't think it's a simple matter of "predestination vs. free will". Basically, I think the two are the results of Christians interpreting the Bible with two different sets of philosophical presuppositions, or definitions or terms like "free will", "causation", "determinism", and so on. I fall pretty close to Arminianism.
2. Either a theistic evolutionist or an evolutionary creationist. What is the different between the two?
3. Basically that Jesus is coming back (in one year, one hundred years, ten thousand...hopefully before we destroy ourselves!), and it will be impossible to miss. Beyond that, I have no idea. I'd have to look into it more.
4. I don't believe in biblical literalism or inerrancy. I suppose this would make my theology more on the liberal side. For example, the Bible presupposed (doesn't argue) that the sky is a solid dome, because that's what the authors believed. Does that mean we should believe the same? Of course not. I do believe the Genesis 1 account was written literally--from the ancient viewpoint and worldview of the Hebrews. If you try to read it from a modern, scientific perspective, you're either going to tie your brain in knots trying to reconcile the two or conclude that it's BS.
5. I have been doing a lot of ANE history and culture research in the last month or so, which has been fascinating and helpful. I am planning on starting a MATS (MA in Theological Studies) this summer focusing on studying the Bible in Greek and Hebrew. Right now I just dabble in biblical Greek word studies.
6. PM totally sent.

Vosur: Going right to the jugular!
1. Yes. (Perhaps this means I don't "get" 1 Corinthians 15:19, but even with no eternal hope I would rather live as a Christian than not)
2. Not sure what you mean here; this is kind of a vague question. Epistemological basis? Explanative basis?
3. Yes. Unlike in Seth Andrews' account, I definitely don't feel like I was "indoctrinated" into the faith. I honestly wasn't too curious about faith at all until my second half of high school, and I don't feel like that interest was because Christianity was drilled into my head--more like the slow awakening of a desire to actually explore what everyone had been telling me about for myself.

GirlyMan: That is an awesome misspelling of my name, but the real one is better. It was inspired by Marth with a Beam Sword in SSBM.
Welcome.
Yes, you may well become "loved" here or is a bewitching infatuation a better term.

I think it was rather unfair of K.C. to hit you with his Calvinism/eschatology queries so quickly.
In my view the 'perfection' of any god,given our limited cognitive abilities, and god being possibly ineffable, cannot be seriously claimed. The perfect nature of god, relevant to what externals?......cannot be known to us other than by weird assumption. The fall,if there ever was one,must hinge on the questionable state fallen from.

Now Jesus it is claimed, on the good side, encouraged forgiveness,kindness,patience, and other admirable traits, as well as what, on the surface comes across as stupidity to many. I would like your view as to the extent of the turning of the cheek directive.

AS for claims of a past perfect 'existence' (Calvinism) from which people chose badness,from the allegedly perfect choices (raffle) and with no latter day chance to redeem themselves,but of suffer on in the secular world, with the saved, and then go to an eternal torturous Hell does not make for a kind and loving god.

I cannot claim to know of eternal extinction or something else.
As for claims that a mighty and powerful god has predetermined a return to "the good life" for some, and eternal torture for others,with no options, is totally foreign to mu sense of reasoning.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mr Woof's post
27-02-2013, 05:43 PM
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 03:39 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(27-02-2013 02:45 PM)DarthMarth Wrote:  Perhaps a similar reason to some of the critiques I read of the "Christian" values in the Bible in Godless. For some, like the violence in the Old Testament, it's natural for a modern reader to be shocked. For other virtues, like the emphasis on, say, poverty or humility, it seemed like Barker was mostly expressing personal dissatisfaction or disagreement with them as ethics; they don't conform to his definition of what it means to live a "good" life. I guess I'm the opposite, then. Though I won't force it on others, I genuinely prefer, say, giving away a large portion of my income (which I can spare from being a software engineer) rather than keeping it for myself. Basically, I've internalized the moral teachings of Christianity, whereas Barker seems to have internalized a different morality that is not compatible with them. And you will tend to prefer living according with whatever morality you have internalized. (This is probably an incomplete response)
I'm going to go ahead and ask you for clarification just to make sure that I don't misunderstand you. Do you prefer being a Christian because you can identify with its moral teachings (far) more than with those of alternative ideologies and religions?

Sorry, like I said, that was an incomplete answer. Your precondition for this question was a bit strange. Do you mean to ask, would I still be a Christian if I still believed in God, but knew that there was no afterlife and we just vanish when we die (which in theology, is called annihilationism)? More below.

(27-02-2013 03:39 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(27-02-2013 02:45 PM)DarthMarth Wrote:  You might be onto something with your "third option". Part of the reason I joined is because I'm wondering if theists and atheists have different epistemologies (philosophies of knowledge and truth), with the skeptical one placing a high emphasis on evidence and proof as the basis for knowledge. For me, I'm not sure the skeptical model of "weigh the evidence for and against a claim before believing anything" as if you were in a court room is universally applicable. I've heard arguments that the alternative to this model is just believing whatever you want (Barker wrote "With faith, anything goes"), but this seems like the same kind of reasoning that leads fundamentalists to demand Biblical literalism because without it, "you can interpret the Bible however you want". There is also a definite feedback effect where your starting point (which is never really neutral) affects how you interpret the available evidence.
The skeptical model that you have mentioned sums up my view most splendidly.

How would you describe yours?
Ah, I'm surprised I summarized your view so well! What I was describing seems to be a generalized version of the scientific method--generate a hypothesis (is there an analogue to this with the existence of God?), examine and analyze the evidence, and draw a reasoned conclusion. I have two thoughts on this.
1. Like I said, this method works well for science--so we call it the "scientific method". But could it be jumping to conclusions to assume it equally works for questions of metaphysics? Of course, science does deal with questions of things that can't be directly picked up by instruments--I'm thinking particle accelerators, which (this could be a simplification) test for the presence of new particles by looking for the remnants of their near-instantaneous decay, as predicted by theory. The hypothesis distills the theoretical work down to an observable whose presence will confirm the theory and its absence disprove it. So, by analogy, even if we can't aim a telescope at the right patch of the sky to find God, we can expect certain things to be true of ourselves, of the world, of the universe, etc. if God existed. Since those things aren't the case, we conclude with sufficient certainty to say that God "probably" doesn't exist. How accurate is this summary?
2. This method presupposed starting at a point of neutrality, but I'm not sure this is possible with questions of belief. My Christian upbringing, for instance, causes me to approach these questions from a certain perspective--and the presuppositions I therefore carry are much deeper than the ones science is worried about. The only time we're truly neutral about the existence of God is when we're babies, and then we're in no position to perform scientific reasoning. How can you be sure you are a fair judge of what's true when your very ability to process what's true is shaped by your background?

"Know that we own minds that could devour the sun/And what we've done will remain although it's gone" - Scar Symmetry
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 05:44 PM
RE: Greeting from a Christian
(27-02-2013 04:46 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Welcome to the forums, DarthMarth. I'm in software QA...and thus your sworn enemy! I shall be scrutinizing your output with great zeal!

Fuckin' QA, that's like IA for cops.

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
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: