3 edits
Trying to demonstrate another fundie's interpretation of the Bible false by appealing to ones own fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible; such a pointless endeavour!
The following captures the exchange that takes place these days between, for example, Robbie Carrobie vs Divegeester:
Person A: look, you're clearly wrong because my Bible says X
Person B: Fool! X can't possibly be true because *my* Bible says Y
Person A: Oh dear! oh dear oh dear oh dear...let me show you how Y is wrong - it clearly states in *my* Bible that X is true which implies Y is false! QED.
Person B: Your Bible is wrong when it says X is true...look! it says so in my Bible!
Person A: Ok, then how do you explain Z in *my* Bible
Person B: Because of W in my Bible!!!
Person A: Yeah but your Bible is wrong - to see this you need to look at the true source of truth; namely *my* Bible
Person B: Can't you see that is completely missing the point of Christianity as is set out in *my* Bible???
Person A: But your Bible can't possibly be true because it says U which is contrary to V as stated in my Bible!
Person B: Show how V holds then...here lemme give you some verses from *my* Bible to help you
Person A: No, we'll use my Bible - the one and only true source
.
.
.
and so on! 😵
2 edits
-Removed-Well to be honest I don't see a great deal of 'spirituality' in your and RC/Galv's scripture slinging. Indeed this used to be a place of interesting philosophical wrangling and battles - a chance to broaden ones mind and test their wits. Now its just the same old chite day in day out:
Person A:I'm right and you're wrong cos my Bible says so
Person B:No!...I'm right and you're wrong cos MY Bible says so
Person B:NO!!!...I'm right and you're wrong cos MY Bible says so
This is the second time you've took it upon yourself to hurl abuse at me - I took the first in good spirit. You need to get a grip, step back, and grow up - this is neither the Christianity Forum nor the Fundamentalist forum. "Spirituality" goes beyond your binary interpretation of ithe word.
4 edits
-Removed-We'll put that one behind us - the main point of this thread was to illustrate, as per its title, the sheer futility of trying to drum it into your theist opponents how your interpretation of some Bible is true by appealing to the same - they merely strike back in the same manner and you're both precisely where you started.
This thread comes across as taking the piss but that is more I suspect because without a particular focus, the toy argument in my OP just looks transparently silly - yet this is pretty much the game you, RJhinds, Galveston, Robbie Carrobie, and whoever else have been playing in more than just a couple of threads.
As for a new thread of mine I was toying with the idea of starting a "Role Reversal" thread where an atheist like myself would defend the fundamentalist stance, and a fundamentalist takes the complimentary stance. The idea being to see how the different sides think (on some particular Christianity related element that is) and to hopefully see both sides exploit a different toolset to achieve the same ends as the other would have. Alas my final exams commence in 3 weeks so now is perhaps not the correct time. I'm currently procrastavising (half procrastinating half revising).
Originally posted by AgergYou're a 'fundie' atheist aren't you?
Trying to demonstrate another fundie's interpretation of the Bible false by appealing to ones own fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible; such a pointless endeavour!
The following captures the exchange that takes place these days between, for example, Robbie Carrobie vs Divegeester:
Person A: look, you're clearly wrong because my Bible says X
P ...[text shortened]... on A: No, we'll use my Bible - the one and only true source
.
.
.
and so on! 😵
2 edits
Originally posted by josephwOk, well firstly I've never burnt a Bible (was given a little Gideon Bible about 17 years ago at school - I 'lost' it)
You agree with me?
A fundamental atheist is one who says, "there is no God".
And then goes out of their way to burn Bibles at every turn.
Secondly I don't tend to say "there is no God", More often I say I don't believe there is a God. Indeed I can remember no time recently that I did make the strong assertion God does not exist with any degree of seriousness.
Try typing
"Agerg" + "redhotchess" + "there is no God"
"Agerg" + "redhotchess" + "God does not exist"
into google and if I'm too forgetful on this matter please post the results.
Originally posted by AgergWhy?
Ok, well firstly I've never burnt a Bible (was given a little Gideon Bible about 17 years ago at school - I 'lost' it)
Secondly I don't tend to say "there is no God", More often I say I don't believe there is a God. Indeed I can remember no time recently that I did make the strong assertion God does not exist with any degree of seriousness.
Try typing
"A ...[text shortened]... into google and if I'm too forgetful on this matter please post the results.
Originally posted by AgergFirst of all I ask if you were a 'fundie' atheist. I did not say you were one. Secondly, whatever you are, I hope and pray that you become as I am. Only better.
To bear out your claim that I am the 'fundie' atheist you assert I am. Indeed a simple google check with variations on the hints I provided makes for a very quick search.
I am a fundamentalist. Do you know what that means?
2 edits
Originally posted by josephwGiven the context of your reply, you didn't ask as much as you made a statement terminated with a rhetorical question mark.
First of all I ask if you were a 'fundie' atheist. I did not say you were one. Secondly, whatever you are, I hope and pray that you become as I am. Only better.
I am a fundamentalist. Do you know what that means?
Are you a 'fundie' atheist? is a question
you're a 'fundie' atheist aren't you? is, unambiguously in this context, a statement.
There is no danger of me becoming like you.
I am a fundamentalist. Do you know what that means?
Yes - see divegeester's thread further down page 1.
1 edit
Originally posted by AgergEverything in this forum is ambiguous!
Given the context of your reply, you didn't ask as much as you made a statement terminated with a rhetorical question mark.
Are you a 'fundie' atheist? is a question
you're a 'fundie' atheist aren't you? is, unambiguously in this context, a statement.
There is no danger of me becoming like you.
[b]I am a fundamentalist. Do you know what that means?
Yes - see divegeester's thread further down page 1.[/b]
You don't know it, but you are in grave danger of becoming like Christ.
That is as soon as you realise how much you need Him.