"A new forum" Thread 20404 (OP)
Original post by Subscriber Russ, 02 Mar '05 04:34
"For posts about religion."
Since March 2, 2005, when the venue for spirituality topics was moved from the Debates Forum to this newly created forum until today Wednesday, July 9, 2014, there have been three thousand four hundred and fourteen (3,414) days. During these nine years and four months, contributors posted a total of three hundred and seven (307) pages containing thirty threads each or nine thousand two hundred and ten (9,210) threads (2.7 new threads each day on average) have been the daily mecca for site members seeking conversation and debate on topics relating to "the supernatural, religion and the life after."
______________________________________________________
If some Red Hot Pawn Spirituality forum contributor who actually believed with certainty that Santa Claus exists, has the supernatural attribute of omniscience; and is capable of traversing all GMT Settings of planet earth annually on the eve of December 24 to distribute children's gifts beneath decorated trees in the living room of their homes or placed in stockings hung by their fireplaces while they were sleeping, started one of those 9,210 threads with the following original post:
Santa Claus (Santa-claus-pics-0101)
I believe in Santa Claus and would urge each you to seriously consider the possibility that he really does exist. Your future happiness is at stake. Here is an example of the evil antisantaclausism movement that is trying to create falsehoods:
"Santa Claus, or Santa, is a figure in North American culture with legendary, mythological and folkloric aspects, which reflect an amalgamation of the Dutch Sinterklaas, the English Father Christmas, and Christmas gift-bringers in other traditions. Santa Claus is said to bring gifts to the homes of good children during the late evening and overnight hours of Christmas Eve, December 24. Santa Claus in this contemporary understanding echoes aspects of hagiographical tales concerning the historical figure of gift-giver Saint Nicholas, the man from whom the name of Santa Claus derives and in whose honor Santa Claus may be referred to as Saint Nicholas or Saint Nick.
Santa Claus is generally depicted as a plump, jolly, white-bearded man wearing a red coat with white collar and cuffs, white-cuffed red trousers, and black leather belt and boots (images of him rarely have a beard with no moustache). This image became popular in the United States and Canada in the 19th century due to the significant influence of caricaturist and political cartoonist Thomas Nast. This image has been maintained and reinforced through song, radio, television, children's books and films. The North American depiction of Santa Claus as it developed in the 19th and 20th century in turn influenced the modern perceptions of Father Christmas, Sinterklaas and Saint Nicholas in European culture.
According to a tradition which can be traced to the 1820s, Santa Claus lives at the North Pole, with a large number of magical elves, and nine (originally eight) flying reindeer. Since the 20th century, in an idea popularized by the 1934 song "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town", Santa Claus has been believed to make a list of children throughout the world, categorizing them according to their behavior ("naughty" or "nice" ) and to deliver presents, including toys, and candy to all of the good boys and girls in the world, and sometimes coal to the naughty children, on the single night of Christmas Eve. He accomplishes this feat with the aid of the elves who make the toys in the workshop and the reindeer who pull his sleigh."
http://characters.wikia.com/wiki/Santa_Claus
______________________________________________________
Questions: How would you respond or react to this serious poster and/or to his or her thread? Would you seriously consider the possibility that Santa Claus may exist? Would you reply with a logical counter argument to neutralize the site member's claims and personal credibility? Would you laugh derisively and add the person to your blacklist? Probably not. Chances are you and I would both summarily dismiss the thread. And, having done so, smile at and ignore the myth as irrelevant.
If someone here claims that Sovereign God exists; and has provided for the reconciliation of depraved mankind to Himself; and offers you the personal grace gift of salvation and eternal life through faith in the person of His uniquely born son Jesus Christ and you decline, why not summarily dismiss the person and claims of the risen Christ and move on in your life? Why would anyone who has thoughtfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby[b]"A new forum"Thread 20404 (OP)
Original post by Subscriber Russ, 02 Mar '05 04:34
"For posts about religion."
Since March 2, 2005, when the venue for spirituality topics was moved from the Debates Forum to this newly created forum until today Wednesday, July 9, 2014, there have been three thousand four ...[text shortened]... tfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?[/b]If the theory of gravity was being challenged in the classroom by the "theory" of flying reindeer (as the theory of evolution is being challenged in the classroom by intelligent design) then we ought to rise up and cut these santa believers down (metaphorically speaking)
Also its worth hanging around if for no other reason to try and get it through your thick skull that there is no such free gift that you claim your god is offering!
Originally posted by Agerg"Why would anyone who has thoughtfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?" And your reason for 'vigorously defending that decision' is because "its worth hanging around if for no other reason to try and get it through your thick skull that there is no such free gift that you claim your god is offering." to help me?
If the theory of gravity was being challenged in the classroom by the "theory" of flying reindeer (as the theory of evolution is being challenged in the classroom by intelligent design) then we ought to rise up and cut these santa believers down (metaphorically speaking)
Also its worth hanging around if for no other reason to try and get it through your thick skull that there is no such free gift that you claim your god is offering!
11 Jul 14
Originally posted by AgergWell, please try to get it through my thick skull that God, who is the author of life, isn't giving eternal life to those who by faith receive eternal life from God as a free gift of His grace.
If the theory of gravity was being challenged [b]in the classroom by the "theory" of flying reindeer (as the theory of evolution is being challenged in the classroom by intelligent design) then we ought to rise up and cut these santa believers down (metaphorically speaking)
Also its worth hanging around if for no other reason to try and get it through your thick skull that there is no such free gift that you claim your god is offering![/b]
Go for it!
11 Jul 14
Originally posted by AgergIt would be easier to claim we have no choices to make if that were really the case, wouldn't it?
If the theory of gravity was being challenged [b]in the classroom by the "theory" of flying reindeer (as the theory of evolution is being challenged in the classroom by intelligent design) then we ought to rise up and cut these santa believers down (metaphorically speaking)
Also its worth hanging around if for no other reason to try and get it through your thick skull that there is no such free gift that you claim your god is offering![/b]
11 Jul 14
"Why would anyone who has thoughtfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?" (Original Post's last sentence)
Is it possibile that honest doubt, which is still considering the option of deciding for rather than against Christ, is the reason?
11 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyActually, debating irrational ideas is one of the best ways to hone one's debating skills. It helps get a debater accustomed to spotting and countering bad arguments like logical fallacies, and this skill carries over to other more serious debates (kind of like taking batting practice against slow pitching help a batter hit faster pitching). If the arguments were at least semi-reasonably well thought out, and I was in the right mood, I possibly would make a counter argument. And it probably wouldn't make much difference to me as to whether the OP was serious, or just playing devil's advocate, as long as they were making a genuine attempt to defend their position.
Questions: How would you respond or react to this serious poster and/or to his or her thread? Would you seriously consider the possibility that Santa Claus may exist? Would you reply with a logical counter argument to neutralize the site member's claims and personal credibility?
Trying to either attack or defend ideas that are obviously false can actually be an interesting intellectual exercise.
12 Jul 14
Originally posted by PatNovakOriginally posted by PatNovak
Actually, debating irrational ideas is one of the best ways to hone one's debating skills. It helps get a debater accustomed to spotting and countering bad arguments like logical fallacies, and this skill carries over to other more serious debates (kind of like taking batting practice against slow pitching help a batter hit faster pitching). If the arguments w ...[text shortened]... ttack or defend ideas that are obviously false can actually be an interesting intellectual exercise.
"Actually, debating irrational ideas is one of the best ways to hone one's debating skills. It helps get a debater accustomed to spotting and countering bad arguments like logical fallacies, and this skill carries over to other more serious debates (kind of like taking batting practice against slow pitching help a batter hit faster pitching)..."
Thanks for your reply, Pat. Your logical rationale makes sense; would you care to comment on the final paragraph as well?
"If someone here claims that Sovereign God exists; and has provided for the reconciliation of depraved mankind to Himself; and offers you the personal grace gift of salvation and eternal life through faith in the person of His uniquely born son Jesus Christ and you decline, why not summarily dismiss the person and claims of the risen Christ and move on in your life? Why would anyone who has thoughtfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?"
12 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby[b]"A new forum"Thread 20404 (OP)
Original post by Subscriber Russ, 02 Mar '05 04:34
"For posts about religion."
Since March 2, 2005, when the venue for spirituality topics was moved from the Debates Forum to this newly created forum until today Wednesday, July 9, 2014, there have been three thousand four ...[text shortened]... tfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?[/b]You forgot 2 leap days!? 😉😛😕ðŸ˜
12 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWhy would anyone who has thoughtfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?
Thanks for your reply, Pat. Your logical rationale makes sense; would you care to comment on the final paragraph as well?
"If someone here claims that Sovereign God exists; and has provided for the reconciliation of depraved mankind to Himself; and offers you the personal grace gift of salvation and eternal life through faith in the person of His uni ...[text shortened]... fully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?"
I am extremely doubtful that his question applies to anyone who has ever been on this forum (or anyone that has ever lived for that matter). This is a question that assumes things that a competent questioner would know are false assumptions (that non-Christians here believe that they have "declined" a "gift", or that they are on this forum to "defend" the "decision" to "decline" said gift). Thus, this is either an unintelligent or unserious question and is unworthy of response.
12 Jul 14
Originally posted by PatNovak"doubtful", fine. Pat, if I were to say to you, God exits and has always existed as a supernatural being with no beginning or end, would you reply: Who is God; or what is God; or on the basis of empiricism and rationalism there is no God or god?
[b]Why would anyone who has thoughtfully declined this gift have a residual need to vigorously defend that decision on this forum?
I am extremely doubtful that his question applies to anyone who has ever been on this forum (or anyone that has ever lived for that matter). This is a question that assumes things that a competent questioner would know ar ...[text shortened]... gift). Thus, this is either an unintelligent or unserious question and is unworthy of response.[/b]
12 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI would reply that you have made two extraordinary claims:
"doubtful", fine. Pat, if I were to say to you, God exits and has always existed as a supernatural being with no beginning or end, would you reply: Who is God; or what is God; or on the basis of empiricism and rationalism there is no God or god?
1) That you know that such a being exists.
2) That you know specific information about such a being (the being has a name and you know what the name is; that this being is supernatural; that this being has no beginning or end).
I would ask that you provide substantial evidence for these claims (preferably evidence that can be thoroughly tested in a scientific manner).
12 Jul 14
Originally posted by PatNovak"I would ask that you provide substantial evidence for these claims (preferably evidence that can be thoroughly tested in a scientific manner)." -PatNovak "... in a scientific manner": One by which man's abilities and efforts receive the credit?
I would reply that you have made two extraordinary claims:
1) That you know that such a being exists.
2) That you know specific information about such a being (the being has a name and you know what the name is; that this being is supernatural; that this being has no beginning or end).
I would ask that you provide substantial evidence for these claims (preferably evidence that can be thoroughly tested in a scientific manner).
12 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI would just like you to present your evidence of your extraordinary claims, and I couldn't care less who receives the credit.
"I would ask that you provide substantial evidence for these claims (preferably evidence that can be thoroughly tested in a scientific manner)." -PatNovak "... in a scientific manner": One by which man's abilities and efforts receive the credit?