In Your Own Words

[connermt]

When asked a question, many believer supply biblical quotes as an answer. Surley it's expected that a believer uses the bible as reference.
When a person asks a question of a believer, why is it that most of the believers seems to only supply the biblical quote?
Surely the person asking can look up said quote on their own, so why can't a believer use their own words along with the quote?
Can a believer only spit out fed data?
Can't a believer not think for themselves and use their own words?
Is it taught to use quotes when their faith is challenged to avoid contradiction?
To the believers who apply this method: why can't you answer questions in your own words?

[nothead]

[Replying to post 1 by connermt]

For many religious, the Word of God is self-evident and of a single interpretation.

When they quote a verse they understand only one possible meaning forthwith.

Some verses may be self-evident and plain. But if the SHEMA gets redefined by trinitarians and JisG and this is AS PLAIN as any of the Ten Commands, then what other verses get distorted?

[Wolfbitn]

So why would it bother anyone if someone quotes form the Bible?

Does it make you angry? Does it hurt you? Can you not accept that people quoting those verses believe this is your best answer?

People around here need to stop assuming they can dictate how someone else believes... Dictating belief is not your place.

Should we talk about how ridiculous it is to be an atheist and how atheists are some of the most hostile people I have ever met? Should i ridicule their belief as "stupid" and "uninformed"? Or should i let them believe as they please and not blanket them together as all hostile and ignorant?

There are a lot of people around here that need to grow up.

.

[ttruscott]

When asked a question, many believer supply biblical quotes as an answer. Surley it's expected that a believer uses the bible as reference.
When a person asks a question of a believer, why is it that most of the believers seems to only supply the biblical quote?
Surely the person asking can look up said quote on their own, so why can't a believer use their own words along with the quote?
Can a believer only spit out fed data?
Can't a believer not think for themselves and use their own words?
Is it taught to use quotes when their faith is challenged to avoid contradiction?
To the believers who apply this method: why can't you answer questions in your own words?

Yet when we do exactly that our personal experience is denigrated as fantasy or psychosis and our personal expression is rejected as unproven. Sheesh.

Can't have it both ways...

Peace, Ted

[Hatuey]

Yet when we do exactly that our personal experience is denigrated as fantasy or psychosis and our personal expression is rejected as unproven. Sheesh.

Can't have it both ways...

Your personal experience is as valid and worthy as anybody else's. Do you accept the personal experience of the muslims? Because you don't have anything more than they do, and they don't have anything more than you. Can't have it both ways...

[connermt]

[Replying to post 3 by Wolfbitn]

So why would it bother anyone if someone quotes form the Bible?

I would think most don't mind as it's expected. But when one asks "what do you think?" and a bible verse is spat out, that's more what some dead guy thinks.

Can you not accept that people quoting those verses believe this is your best answer?

Personally, I'm not interested in some dead guys answer,a nd I already know mine, I want to know YOURS. If that's influenced by a verse or two, OK. But surely one can expound on a verse on how it impacts them personally, no?

[connermt]

[Replying to post 4 by ttruscott]

Yet when we do exactly that our personal experience is denigrated as fantasy...

Well, if your personal experience seems fantastic, it should be expected to be received as such. Simply because you may relate a mystical, fantastic experience doesn't mean you should expect auto acceptance or push-back.

...our personal expression is rejected as unproven.

For me, as long as it's accompanied by "I believe that blah blah blah" that's OK (even if it seems silly to me). The issue that many run into is that certain people use the terms BELIEF and KNOW interchangeably which isn't accurate. Sometimes, you don't even use the term BELIEVE at all.
When stated as fact when it can't be shown as fact, that's where you run into issues. At which point, complaints start coming....

[connermt]

[Replying to post 2 by nothead]

For many religious, the Word of God is self-evident and of a single interpretation.

While I'd agree in theory, it sure doesn't seem that way in reality.

When they quote a verse they understand only one possible meaning forthwith.

Maybe because that's what they're taught, instead of thinking for themselves?

But if the SHEMA gets redefined by trinitarians and JisG and this is AS PLAIN as any of the Ten Commands, then what other verses get distorted?

Probably all of them.

[Ooberman]

When asked a question, many believer supply biblical quotes as an answer. Surley it's expected that a believer uses the bible as reference.
When a person asks a question of a believer, why is it that most of the believers seems to only supply the biblical quote?
Surely the person asking can look up said quote on their own, so why can't a believer use their own words along with the quote?
Can a believer only spit out fed data?
Can't a believer not think for themselves and use their own words?
Is it taught to use quotes when their faith is challenged to avoid contradiction?
To the believers who apply this method: why can't you answer questions in your own words?

Yet when we do exactly that our personal experience is denigrated as fantasy or psychosis and our personal expression is rejected as unproven. Sheesh.

Can't have it both ways...

Peace, Ted

Classic redirection when challeneged. Here the believer is claiming that quoting the Bible or personal experience are the only things to offer in a debate.

The Believer, no doubt, has a mental state that associates all his beliefs with beliefs in the Bible. This is the classic "Bible says it, I believe it".

He is trying to be flippant about something he doesn't consider important: actual proof, demonstration, or something other than some extracted quote or anecdotal stories.

The easiest thing for a Believer to do is simply wave off objections as unimportant.

I guarantee Believers don't act this flippantly about evidence when they are talking to their doctor about their child's illness.

But, since religious claims are such a joke, they find it easy to stretch truths or reject valid questions.


Note the Believer, one of the worst offenders of "Bible quotes as argument", pretends to be in an untenable position:

"If I can't use the Bible, then it's only my personal beliefs, and we know how useless that is! How can I argue if I don't use the facts as I see them?"


That's the strength of materialism, I don't need to appeal to special reasons to accept my evidence. We all agree:
1. We don't know everything
2. Nature exists
3. Evidence of a claim is better than no evidence. Good evidence is better than poor evidence.
4. We differ on what makes a "good explanation".

I see Religions as wishful thinking. They are the art of Positive Thinking. None of the good that has happened in any religion can be said to be "from God". This is simply an untenable position, because it presupposes the God it requires.

The issue isn't "Is there a God?" That is, the materialist isn't presupposing there can't be a God, but that the character of that God can't be defended.

For example, the Argument against Divine Proxy Murder. Any Religion that claims God commanded anything but Good, then it wouldn't be rational to kill children - unless there was a primitive tribe that believed, in it's time, that God required child deaths.

Clearly, Good is defined by such distinctions. If Theists assert their God is Perfectly Good, then it would have to fit the description of Good - as understood by the Witness of the Holy Spirit.

In the absence of positive, inconvertible evidence, there is no difference between a mad man and a gesture for a Loving, Rational Being.

Certainly, no one would accept the slaughter of their family on such a claim: it seems universal that no one would accept the command from God to Kill or Die that wouldn't seem, also, exactly like some one with severe mental illness, and not a gift from God.

I challenge anyone to defend their God against this, based on rational reasons.

Quetions:

1. What reason would you accept for your own execution?
2. Would you accept it if the man said "God told me"?
3. Why would we think any many would act so unreasonably: to slaughter men, women, children, and livestock? Because God told him? How is that a rational response, knowing what we know about Psychiatry & Psychology?

[Zzyzx]

.

So why would it bother anyone if someone quotes form the Bible?

Check Sub-forum Guidelines. The bible is not to be considered authoritative. Would quotations from the Qur'an be convincing to Christians in debate?

Since you (generic term) KNOW bible quotes are not convincing to Non-Christians (and perhaps to many Christians), what is the purpose of inserting them into debates?

Does it make you angry? Does it hurt you?

Quite the opposite, I find it amusing that people think others are as easily persuaded as they are.

However, quoting unverifiable sources is NOT debate (which is what we supposedly do here).

Can you not accept that people quoting those verses believe this is your best answer?

Can you (generic term) not accept that Non-Christian debaters have no reason to accept the bible as anything more than folklore, fable, myth or fantasy? I, personally, do not accept answers from literature that I consider less than reliable, including fiction, fantasy, folklore, etc.

Those who need bible quotes to bolster their "arguments" should check out Holy Huddle and TD&D sub-forums where they can bible quote and preach each other to delirium if they wish.

People around here need to stop assuming they can dictate how someone else believes... Dictating belief is not your place.

Has someone actually attempted to dictate how anyone else believes? Citation? Quotation?

Should we talk about how ridiculous it is to be an atheist and how atheists are some of the most hostile people I have ever met?

It must seem that way to those who do not fare well in debate while trying to defend supernatural beliefs that contradict real-world information.

Should i ridicule their belief as "stupid" and "uninformed"?

It sure is a good thing that no angry, hostile, "persecuted" Christians ever do such a thing, isn't it?

Or should i let them believe as they please and not blanket them together as all hostile and ignorant?

What you do is of no more consequence than what you say.

There are a lot of people around here that need to grow up.

It is ironic that you, of all people, would choose to say that.