Evidence for God from Science

Can you please quote Fortigurn. After Reading his post above I really don't see where he attacked your Character??

Fortigurn wrote:

August wrote:Did you bother to read any of the Bible verses that he referred, like Ex 15:32-36? Try it.

You can always tell who has done their homework.

Unhelpful.

ummmm I believe you may have taken that the wrong way. He was saying that because August probably noticed the Verse and then realized there was no such thing. However I will allow Fortigurn stand on his own words there. I am not sure if that comment was ment to criticize you or not?

David, it comes down to credibility. I think if we are to have a fruitful discussion, then the very least you can do is to verify the sources that you provide.

No offense to you, really, but I think you will notice by now that there are a few here that are serious scholars, and there is much more to Christianity than is presented publicly.

We have seen most, if not all, arguments that atheists present, in one form or other. Farrell Till and his attacks on inerrancy have been around for at least 20 years, and have been dealt with before. If you wish to provide us with links, and expect us to answer that, then the least you can do is see if the position held by the author is at least credible. We don't link swap you, we explain everything here and now. For us to do that, we need at least a level of scholarship and accuracy that provides us with the opportunity to address it.

It is therefore not helpful for your case if we start reading the article, and the Scriptural references are non-existent, or, as Till does, purposefully manipulated to misrepresent the language or chronologies.

So when Fortigurn and I refer to this, it is not meant to slight you, but a reminder that we take this seriously, and we expect you to do the same. Blind quoting of atheist propagandists is not taking it seriously.

You misunderstand my motives. This ex post facto business is a red herring. It isn't why I made the thread. I do not claim any particular level of validity in that particular source. It was a randomly plucked example of using quotes from the bible to support a viewpoint and a hopeless attempt at keeping the thread on track by linking the red herring with the original post's theme of biblical interpretation. This evidently failed. My original intention was not to "link swap" but to give an example of people using bible quotes for their own viewpoint. This is a red herring, and deserves no further discussion.

What does deserve further discussion is the title of the thread - Leviticus 18. I am genuinely interested in how the Christian mind tackles passages like this, as parts of it obviously go against what we may deem as popular moral belief today. For example, the idea of shunning homosexuals would not be acceptable in most of today's civilised nations. I am genuinely seeking answers about these things. You needn't put up the defenses as soon as somebody, for example me, doesn't believe what you believe without asking for evidence. I am genuinely trying to find out what people think about this, but it seems that by asking such a question I am insulting you. I intend not to insult you. You needn't be defensive, as I will never be aggressive.

This said, surely it tells you that it doesn't matter whether you've heard all of the arguments before. My question isn't an argument, rather a query. I am not trying to attack you, I am trying to discover how your mind works as opposed to mine. As soon as you let go of the assumption that I am trying to be Farrel Till, the discussions will open up to be a productive and helpful exchange. I am trying to find out whether the Christian mind thinks about these things in great depth or not. If not, why. If so, tell me. Great - everyone's happy.

David

bizzt wrote:ummmm I believe you may have taken that the wrong way. He was saying that because August probably noticed the Verse and then realized there was no such thing. However I will allow Fortigurn stand on his own words there. I am not sure if that comment was ment to criticize you or not?

Yes that is right. It was a comment on August, no one else.

pdavid wrote:You misunderstand my motives. This ex post facto business is a red herring. It isn't why I made the thread. I do not claim any particular level of validity in that particular source. It was a randomly plucked example of using quotes from the bible to support a viewpoint and a hopeless attempt at keeping the thread on track by linking the red herring with the original post's theme of biblical interpretation. This evidently failed. My original intention was not to "link swap" but to give an example of people using bible quotes for their own viewpoint. This is a red herring, and deserves no further discussion.

What does deserve further discussion is the title of the thread - Leviticus 18. I am genuinely interested in how the Christian mind tackles passages like this, as parts of it obviously go against what we may deem as popular moral belief today. For example, the idea of shunning homosexuals would not be acceptable in most of today's civilised nations. I am genuinely seeking answers about these things. You needn't put up the defenses as soon as somebody, for example me, doesn't believe what you believe without asking for evidence. I am genuinely trying to find out what people think about this, but it seems that by asking such a question I am insulting you. I intend not to insult you. You needn't be defensive, as I will never be aggressive.

This said, surely it tells you that it doesn't matter whether you've heard all of the arguments before. My question isn't an argument, rather a query. I am not trying to attack you, I am trying to discover how your mind works as opposed to mine. As soon as you let go of the assumption that I am trying to be Farrel Till, the discussions will open up to be a productive and helpful exchange. I am trying to find out whether the Christian mind thinks about these things in great depth or not. If not, why. If so, tell me. Great - everyone's happy.

David

No-one is being defensive or aggressive. You brought up a red herring, as you admitted, and it was pointed out to you that if you want to have any credibility, you should make sure your sources are up to scratch.

You have seen the explanations on Lev 18, do you have any other questions on this passage that have not been answered?

So David, you are nothing but a cheap liar. You want be play the victim here every time you get painted into a corner, so that we should feel sorry for you and keep answering the objections and queries that we have all refuted a million times, all under the veil of wanting to convert people to atheism, sorry, reason.

Why don't you go back to your atheist buddies and go boast about the irrationality of Christianity, and how I "needed to get my bearings before answering you"?

While you are at it, why don't you ask your high priest Dawkins why he won't debate his fellow Oxford professor Alistair McGrath in public, a challenge that has stood for 8 years?

This is typical of the behavior we have come to expect from people like you.

If you want to have a formal debate, let me know, or take your arguments somewhere else.

I am trying to find out whether the Christian mind thinks about these things in great depth or not. If not, why. If so, tell me. Great - everyone's

All you have to do is do a search on some past posts on the subject. You'll find plenty of info if you sincerely care to learn.

FFC wrote:

I am trying to find out whether the Christian mind thinks about these things in great depth or not. If not, why. If so, tell me. Great - everyone's

All you have to do is do a search on some past posts on the subject. You'll find plenty of info if you sincerely care to learn.

He doesn't. He wants to have "adult conversations" so that those who are marginal in their beliefs can "see reason" and become atheists. He has been ripping Christians off at the Richard Dawkins forums.

August wrote:

FFC wrote:

I am trying to find out whether the Christian mind thinks about these things in great depth or not. If not, why. If so, tell me. Great - everyone's

All you have to do is do a search on some past posts on the subject. You'll find plenty of info if you sincerely care to learn.

He doesn't. He wants to have "adult conversations" so that those who are marginal in their beliefs can "see reason" and become atheists. He has been ripping Christians off at the Richard Dawkins forums.

I kind of figured that. I should have realized that subtilty would be lost on him.