|
Post by Mikie on May 16, 2008 11:58:10 GMT -5
thanks for you valiant effort at explaining your thoughts on the debate, dietcoke.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on May 16, 2008 13:09:40 GMT -5
thanks for you valiant effort at explaining your thoughts on the debate, dietcoke. You're welcome...I guess! Sounds a bit tongue in cheek.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 16, 2008 13:25:01 GMT -5
You're welcome...I guess! Sounds a bit tongue in cheek. Well, my thoughts were similar. Not insincere, but I just think you have a very difficult position to attempt to defend... you're doing as good a job as I would think can be done, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on May 16, 2008 14:01:42 GMT -5
that's funny, CUL. Because it all depends upon what prior beliefs you bring to the table. It's nearly impossible to convince anybody against their religion.
My honest opinion is that SW has an indefensible position, being forced to argue against common sense, and anyone who takes off their religious blinders will see this. He is making a great attempt at an impossible argument.
My weakness is that I refuse to play the same game by appealing to the "Jesus is not God" crowd. My supposition, that Matthew is a real person with real ideas of his own that differs from the ideas of other N.T. writers, will be unpopular on any religious board.
Ain't religion fun?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 16, 2008 14:54:02 GMT -5
Sure, I already believe Jesus is God. But that's not the point. I can also see that the point is well-supported by Matthew and the other scripture in question. Especially if you don't take contrary beliefs "to the table", such as the idea that the concept is somehow "against common sense". You speak about what you call "blinders", yet you wear your own.
And by the way, that's not a weakness -- appealing to a crowd doesn't make for a good argument.
|
|
|
Post by common sense on May 16, 2008 17:55:52 GMT -5
Sure, I already believe Jesus is God. But that's not the point. I can also see that the point is well-supported by Matthew and the other scripture in question. Especially if you don't take contrary beliefs "to the table", such as the idea that the concept is somehow "against common sense". You speak about what you call "blinders", yet you wear your own. And by the way, that's not a weakness -- appealing to a crowd doesn't make for a good argument. if one was to argue the case for Jesus being God, then Jesus was both God and human, and God, was only God, which is circular reasoning indefined by a real concept. argueing against our own sanity, and yet the catholics defend it, too. oh well
|
|
|
Post by Mikie on May 16, 2008 18:01:57 GMT -5
thanks for you valiant effort at explaining your thoughts on the debate, dietcoke. You're welcome...I guess! Sounds a bit tongue in cheek. Wow, dc, you got a sound bite out of my post, hmm, ok, maybe I will rrestate my take, ...I agree with most of your arguements, except for the part that you retract as tho there is still a posasibility that Jesus will get promoted some day to be God, hey, that sound bites of LDS, in my world, oh dear!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on May 16, 2008 18:50:25 GMT -5
Starwelters and dietcoke. Report to the Abbott's room immediately for a flogging with a LARGE handful of e-noodles.
I remind you of the rules:
Debaters are not to discuss the topic in other threads until the debate is formally closed.
|
|
|
Post by wanttobewithGod on May 16, 2008 23:44:59 GMT -5
LOL, Rob. That still makes me laugh. M.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on May 17, 2008 21:53:43 GMT -5
d--n, that hurts!! I thought it was just an e-noodle.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on May 17, 2008 22:11:29 GMT -5
I agree with most of your arguements, except for the part that you retract as tho there is still a posasibility that Jesus will get promoted some day to be God, hey, that sound bites of LDS, in my world, oh dear!! ;D I'll risk that e-noodle again long enough to say...I'd be happy to debate the other side, this time from Johannian writings. The gospel of John and the book of Revelation teach that Jesus is God. The synoptic gospels don't. I'm not retracting...that has been my stance from the beginning. Some believe Jesus was promoted to God at Nicea. Others believe he was God all along. Both are wrong. Jesus was promoted to God halfway through the New Testament.
|
|
|
Post by Mikie on May 18, 2008 18:28:02 GMT -5
I agree with most of your arguements, promoted some day to ;D I'll risk that e-noodle again long enough to say...I'd be happy to debate the other side, this time from Johannian writings. The gospel of John and the book of Revelation teach that Jesus is God. The synoptic gospels don't. I'm not retracting...that has been my stance from the beginning. Some believe Jesus was promoted to God at Nicea. Others believe he was God all along. Both are wrong. Jesus was promoted to God halfway through the New Testament. hey, keep me posted if there are more job opennings (is it a volenteer work, or st. salaried) oooch, no more from me, i thing i just got winged too. ;D
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on May 19, 2008 11:18:12 GMT -5
I won't tell you what Scott just brought in a baggie through the back door. In about an hour, we will have fresh brownies. Gem, your skirt is a little long. You will get better tips if you bring it up a notch.
|
|
|
Post by degem on May 19, 2008 11:23:41 GMT -5
Well I see eyedeetentee you are up to your old tricks. My skirt length is fine-it covers up my knobby knees.
|
|
|
Post by Star Welters on May 20, 2008 7:42:52 GMT -5
Starwelters and dietcoke. Report to the Abbott's room immediately for a flogging with a LARGE handful of e-noodles. I remind you of the rules: Debaters are not to discuss the topic in other threads until the debate is formally closed. consider me e-flogged.
|
|
|
Post by Star Welters on May 23, 2008 12:00:32 GMT -5
It's getting uncomforatable sitting here...by myself...twiddling my thumbs...sore from the e-flogging. Was it something I said?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on May 23, 2008 12:48:47 GMT -5
It's getting uncomforatable sitting here...by myself...twiddling my thumbs...sore from the e-flogging. Was it something I said? You should get a good flogging on your birthday!!! Scott
|
|
|
Post by human potato on May 23, 2008 13:33:14 GMT -5
Sure, I already believe Jesus is God. But that's not the point. I can also see that the point is well-supported by Matthew and the other scripture in question. Especially if you don't take contrary beliefs "to the table", such as the idea that the concept is somehow "against common sense". if Jesus being God, then Jesus was both God and human, and God, was only God, which is circular reasoning undefineable by any logic. argueing against our own sanity. oh well God is only God, but Jesus is both human and God, and yet we know that if Jesus was God, and God is only God, how can he be something that is unatainable logically. Would it be possible for a human being, to be both a vegetable and a human being? Not logically sound, although I do know that human couch potatoes are said to exist! hmmmm ;D
|
|
|
Post by point being on May 23, 2008 13:36:26 GMT -5
Sorry I missed my final comment, : If Jesus was God, then he could be ONLY God, as it is impossible for him to be both man and God, because we know that God is ONLY God.
|
|
|
Post by Star Welters on May 23, 2008 14:47:59 GMT -5
Sorry I missed my final comment, : If Jesus was God, then he could be ONLY God, as it is impossible for him to be both man and God, because we know that God is ONLY God. *wincing* (i know i'm gonna get smacked around if i get sucked into this.) I'd love to respond to the above comment. I won't say anything but someone should. The above comment has a tremendous fallacy in bold but I won't point out why until the debate is done.
|
|
|
Post by the eflogger on May 23, 2008 16:57:34 GMT -5
okay watch out my friends, the e-flogger is lurking around waiting to flog those who step out of line.
|
|
|
Post by the eflogger on May 23, 2008 17:00:04 GMT -5
and especially for you starwelters since it is your birthday you won't receive any e-floggings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2008 21:28:07 GMT -5
Sorry I missed my final comment, : If Jesus was God, then he could be ONLY God, as it is impossible for him to be both man and God, because we know that God is ONLY God. *wincing* I won't say anything but someone should. The above comment has a tremendous fallacy call it ''fallacy'' to believe/ and/or say that God is God, it certainly cannot be called a false statement. we are trying to discuss three persons , therefore God is not God, ;D **wincing too** Perhaps my understanding, is a private interpretation, and shouldn't be discussed, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Star Welters on May 24, 2008 0:52:41 GMT -5
consider registering so we could PM about it....
|
|
|
Post by impossiblity on May 24, 2008 9:26:34 GMT -5
[/qte] Would it be possible both a vegetable and a human being? I know human couch potatos ! ;D Can a human being truely understand the limits of plant intelligence? It doesn't seem possible to really understand what it really is like to be a plant, because we would have to stop using our human reasonings, eh?
|
|
|
Post by registering on May 24, 2008 9:48:29 GMT -5
*wincing* The above comment has a tremendous fallacy call it ''fallacy'' thanks for registering, guest!
|
|
|
Post by honest question on May 28, 2008 11:53:42 GMT -5
I can understand why Starwelters would be willing to defend the deity of Jesus, but I just have to ask Diet Coke: if you believe that other authors describe Jesus as God, what is the point? What are you debating - bottom line? Is this really an argument against inerrancy? The canon? What? I'm missing something.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on May 28, 2008 12:54:46 GMT -5
"honest", I think what it really boils down to is we are debating what starwelters calls the "unity of the scripture." We are kind of debating whether Matthew had a mind of his own, able to form his own ideas, or whether he was merely a writing stick for God to pick up and pen his story with. It probably is not at all what starwelters thought he would be debating when we started, so give him credit.
|
|