Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
    Bolded: You are gaslighting here, whether intentional or not. Gabe asked questions, made statements of personal convictions, and posted interesting facts. Never mind your confused argument, the gaslighting is unacceptable in rational discussion.

    Rest of the above post: The discussion was about translations AND canon, part of the overall discussion that the Bible we have, while the best we know, has been heavily edited over the millennia. The rest, no offense to you personally and I hope I misunderstand you, is poppycock. Age of canon, translation versions and errors, all must be considered when researching and evaluating the validity of ANY historical work, to include Scripture.

    I don’t understand your point other than maybe trying to posit that none of this matters as Scripture is enough?
    To start out, no offense taken to any the above, but...

    "Gaslighting," seriously? That summary of my point, which follows an attempt to demonstrate the unsoundness of Gabe's argument (however convincing you may or may not find it), hardly amounts to gaslighting. I'm not trying to take control of his perception of reality by telling him that what he sees isn't actually there so that he falls apart mentally, which is (in my summary) what gaslighting is. It should be obvious that's not what I'm doing.

    As to the rest: Yes, I'm aware that all those things are relevant in some manner in presenting a book to someone and saying, "Here's the Bible, folks." Not my point, however. My point was that Gabe's enthymematic reliance on the age of a particular translation or a particular canon, taking its age on its own to insinuate present unreliability in some particulars of the text we have, is unsound logic because age alone doesn't support that conclusion. Now of course I may have misunderstood his point and am quite willing to be corrected there. But that's what I understood the point to be, so that's why I responded as I did.

    That aside, not sure how my argument is "poppycock" without any direct refutation other than the generalized point that those evaluating the Scripture need to account for age of the documents in question and keep a watchful eye for errors. Agreed, but that doesn't really answer my point, as summarized above. And yeah, the Scripture is sufficient for its purpose, and we also need to make sure that what we have has been put together properly and that our translations are done accurately. Not sure how your remarks refute my basic agreement with that notion. And in any event the original discussion had to do with Gabe's insinuation that things are not stated in the Scripture, therefore missing, and we're free to draw our own conclusions about what Jesus may have done or not, based on what LawDog and I were saying are inappropriate bases. And then somehow the King James commissioning the translation named for him got into play in a discussion about the Council of Nicaea, which as I pointed out in the other thread, isn't relevant to that Council or what the men there did.

    So yeah, canon discussion was separate and then got conflated with later translations. That's also part of what I was trying to get at: It just doesn't matter that there are better or worse later translations with regard to whether the Council of Jerusalem did its job long before those translations of the canon the Council promulgated.

    Hopefully now my argument is more clear?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,761
    I don't know about all of this. I use to be in this world and these kinds of topics use to take up my time. Since this is a tactical place I guess you have to first identify your mission. Is your mission to know God? Is your mission to have Christ as your best friend, older brother and to recognize Him as the true King of Kings that in reality He truly is? If it is and that is what you most desire, then I promise you, He will give you everything you need to accomplish your mission even if He has to split this world wide open and give you some special book to read. He probably doesn't need to do that but He won't hang you out to dry. Just my thoughts and I'll step out of this one. Consider these thoughts if it helps or reject it if it isn't right.
    I was born for a storm, and a calm does not suit me. - Andrew Jackson

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    47,925
    I am shaking my head this morning and chuckling as this very thread illustrates why I moved away from the religion/theology world. It really is time poorly spent as most here have already made up their minds about such things and are closed off to anything else. I recall the pointless but very spirited discussions in the early days...things that I jumped into with both feet. Post-trib/pre-trib, age of the earth, whether dinosaurs actually existed, UFOs, and other such earth-shattering and important things...LOL. Not much has changed...but one thing has. Its not my problem really.

    This thread reminds me of Macbeth - "Thou doth protest too much"

    And "tactical place"...eh...maybe. I was hoping we'd moved beyond that.
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel Suarez View Post
    I am shaking my head this morning and chuckling as this very thread illustrates why I moved away from the religion/theology world. It really is time poorly spent as most here have already made up their minds about such things and are closed off to anything else. I recall the pointless but very spirited discussions in the early days...things that I jumped into with both feet. Post-trib/pre-trib, age of the earth, whether dinosaurs actually existed, UFOs, and other such earth-shattering and important things...LOL. Not much has changed...but one thing has. Its not my problem really.

    This thread reminds me of Macbeth - "Thou doth protest too much"

    And "tactical place"...eh...maybe. I was hoping we'd moved beyond that.
    Or maybe I just don't understand exactly what is being discussed here? I could be missing something here. I am getting older.
    I was born for a storm, and a calm does not suit me. - Andrew Jackson

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Faramir2 View Post
    To start out, no offense taken to any the above, but...

    "Gaslighting," seriously? That summary of my point, which follows an attempt to demonstrate the unsoundness of Gabe's argument (however convincing you may or may not find it), hardly amounts to gaslighting. I'm not trying to take control of his perception of reality by telling him that what he sees isn't actually there so that he falls apart mentally, which is (in my summary) what gaslighting is. It should be obvious that's not what I'm doing.

    As to the rest: Yes, I'm aware that all those things are relevant in some manner in presenting a book to someone and saying, "Here's the Bible, folks." Not my point, however. My point was that Gabe's enthymematic reliance on the age of a particular translation or a particular canon, taking its age on its own to insinuate present unreliability in some particulars of the text we have, is unsound logic because age alone doesn't support that conclusion. Now of course I may have misunderstood his point and am quite willing to be corrected there. But that's what I understood the point to be, so that's why I responded as I did.

    That aside, not sure how my argument is "poppycock" without any direct refutation other than the generalized point that those evaluating the Scripture need to account for age of the documents in question and keep a watchful eye for errors. Agreed, but that doesn't really answer my point, as summarized above. And yeah, the Scripture is sufficient for its purpose, and we also need to make sure that what we have has been put together properly and that our translations are done accurately. Not sure how your remarks refute my basic agreement with that notion. And in any event the original discussion had to do with Gabe's insinuation that things are not stated in the Scripture, therefore missing, and we're free to draw our own conclusions about what Jesus may have done or not, based on what LawDog and I were saying are inappropriate bases. And then somehow the King James commissioning the translation named for him got into play in a discussion about the Council of Nicaea, which as I pointed out in the other thread, isn't relevant to that Council or what the men there did.

    So yeah, canon discussion was separate and then got conflated with later translations. That's also part of what I was trying to get at: It just doesn't matter that there are better or worse later translations with regard to whether the Council of Jerusalem did its job long before those translations of the canon the Council promulgated.

    Hopefully now my argument is more clear?
    Yes, gaslighting, but a failed attempt at it. Framing an argument that wasn’t there, and persistently arguing that false narrative. Not much different than a straw man attack, really. You’re doubling down, which is fine. I’m out.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel Suarez View Post
    I am shaking my head this morning and chuckling as this very thread illustrates why I moved away from the religion/theology world. It really is time poorly spent as most here have already made up their minds about such things and are closed off to anything else. I recall the pointless but very spirited discussions in the early days...things that I jumped into with both feet. Post-trib/pre-trib, age of the earth, whether dinosaurs actually existed, UFOs, and other such earth-shattering and important things...LOL. Not much has changed...but one thing has. Its not my problem really.

    This thread reminds me of Macbeth - "Thou doth protest too much"

    And "tactical place"...eh...maybe. I was hoping we'd moved beyond that.
    You’re not kidding, and I spent quite a few years deeply in the religion/theology world, speaking, researching, and debating with scholars and thorough researchers.

    Unfortunately “Christians” are easily some of the biggest hypocrites on the planet, blindly refusing to acknowledge cognitive dissonance; and I strongly consider myself a Christian. Or they’re na´ve, myopic, or just simply unintelligent and capable only of emotional responses. We’ve seen it over and over even on this forum with the Christian Warrior vs the ridiculous modern “Christian” mindset. Marxism has almost entirely swallowed the Church.

    Keep doing what you are doing, please. It matters! This sub forum is what caused me to find SI and hugely impacted my life for the better.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
    You’re not kidding, and I spent quite a few years deeply in the religion/theology world, speaking, researching, and debating with scholars and thorough researchers.

    Unfortunately “Christians” are easily some of the biggest hypocrites on the planet, blindly refusing to acknowledge cognitive dissonance; and I strongly consider myself a Christian. Or they’re na´ve, myopic, or just simply unintelligent and capable only of emotional responses. We’ve seen it over and over even on this forum with the Christian Warrior vs the ridiculous modern “Christian” mindset. Marxism has almost entirely swallowed the Church.

    Keep doing what you are doing, please. It matters! This sub forum is what caused me to find SI and hugely impacted my life for the better.
    Well ok. I don't want to be a hypocrite or one blindly refusing to acknowledge cognitive dissonance or naive or myopic or unintelligent or only capable of only emotional responses. But to be fair, I'm further from being a Marxist than you can possibly imagine. I'm assuming that there is something I need to learn and you are capable of teaching me. If so, what is it? Trust but verify. Ok, been there, done that, and always will. Is there something more I'm missing? This whole conversation seems like people are mad at other people and no one can say exactly why that is. It is very strange.
    I was born for a storm, and a calm does not suit me. - Andrew Jackson

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Knowledge View Post
    Well ok. I don't want to be a hypocrite or one blindly refusing to acknowledge cognitive dissonance or naive or myopic or unintelligent or only capable of only emotional responses. But to be fair, I'm further from being a Marxist than you can possibly imagine. I'm assuming that there is something I need to learn and you are capable of teaching me. If so, what is it? Trust but verify. Ok, been there, done that, and always will. Is there something more I'm missing? This whole conversation seems like people are mad at other people and no one can say exactly why that is. It is very strange.
    In this case, one-sided arguing. Posting lots of words without much point to avoid the concept that maybe, just maybe, humans are fallible and there is more to Christian history than what we read in the New American Standard or King James Version of the Holy Bible.

    I’m not accusing anyone of Marxism, just their way of thinking. It artificially stunts the brain and most have no idea its even a thing. I had no idea until I was in my 20’s and a friend pointed me in the right direction. Things to look into? Dean Gotcher, Dialectic and Diaprax. Learn how the modern education system and Church are now structured around emotional, cognitively dissonant arguments while rational, logical discourse is not allowed. It legitimately breaks the brain, but it (I hope) can be fixed. Once you understand that, you can research and read dispassionately, or at least understand what is happening during all of these discussions.

    I don’t know why I keep pointing at the water trough, almost no one actually walks over and takes a drink. And I’m a novice compared to some others I’ve read here.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
    Yes, gaslighting, but a failed attempt at it. Framing an argument that wasn’t there, and persistently arguing that false narrative. Not much different than a straw man attack, really. You’re doubling down, which is fine. I’m out.
    Doubt I'll get a response to this comment, since you've concluded I'm doubling down, but I'll end my discussion on here with this: I've attempted to explain why I read Gabe's argument the way I did and then offered a refutation, acknowledging particularly in response to your comments that I'm open to being shown how I misunderstood Gabe's point. And if I misunderstood it, then I'll happily change my approach and, if necessary, my argument. But you haven't explained what his argument was and how my response revealed that I misconstrued it, only said (in other words) that I'm trying to manipulate him. I'm not trying to manipulate anyone, only respond to Gabe's argument after describing what I understood his argument to be and then given my response.

    So I guess that's that. Not sure what of your later comment quoting Gabe's was indirectly aimed at me, but all I'll say is that to the extent any of it had me in mind, I'm by no means a Marxist and have tried to explain myself thoroughly and logically. I actually share a lot of your opinion of contemporary Christians but nonetheless endeavor to not be like those who fit your unfortunately accurate description and defend orthodoxy as thoroughly, honestly, and soundly as I know how.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
    In this case, one-sided arguing. Posting lots of words without much point to avoid the concept that maybe, just maybe, humans are fallible and there is more to Christian history than what we read in the New American Standard or King James Version of the Holy Bible.

    I’m not accusing anyone of Marxism, just their way of thinking. It artificially stunts the brain and most have no idea its even a thing. I had no idea until I was in my 20’s and a friend pointed me in the right direction. Things to look into? Dean Gotcher, Dialectic and Diaprax. Learn how the modern education system and Church are now structured around emotional, cognitively dissonant arguments while rational, logical discourse is not allowed. It legitimately breaks the brain, but it (I hope) can be fixed. Once you understand that, you can research and read dispassionately, or at least understand what is happening during all of these discussions.

    I don’t know why I keep pointing at the water trough, almost no one actually walks over and takes a drink. And I’m a novice compared to some others I’ve read here.
    Other books you can recommend? I've gathered you're not impressed with my discussion so far, but I do like to learn and don't care for a lot of what passes for logical discussion among all sorts of people, within and without the Church. So, I would appreciate recommendations.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •