Apparently by the rules posed by this site, using scripture is basically marked as preaching. It isn't considered "authoritative" which is fine with me, but isn't that our debate? Our debate is whether or not is scripture is authoritative? So by the rules of this site, the debate is thrown away before it even begins. The debate is whether or not the scripture is true, and by the rules it is automatically marked against. So when we use the scripture to make a point, it is demonized as "preaching".
I have literally been told by an authority here that using the scripture extensively is considered "preaching"... But our entire debate hinges on the scripture... It is hinged on whether or not the scripture is true.
In fact there have been debates from atheist that "Jesus is a wondering preaching, who died because he crossed paths with the wrong people"... But where do they get that from? They basically get that from the scripture! But if we show them that by the prophesies of the scripture, that predate Christ's historical death, show that his death was the will of God... If we show that by using scripture, we are then "preaching"?
How does that make sense? Seems to me that this "preaching" rule is a huge grey area, and it is abused frequently by select people.
Using scripture is "preaching"?
Moderator: Moderators
-
Divine Insight
- Savant
- Posts: 18070
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
- Location: Here & Now
- Been thanked: 19 times
Post #2
I've posted Biblical Scripture quite often and I've never been accused of preaching.
I think it's only considered preaching if you post it as though it represents indisputable truth or authority.
If you want to "debate" the scriptures then what you need to do is post the scripture in question and open up a dialog concerning why people should or shouldn't believe the claims made by those particular scriptures.
I think it's only considered preaching if you post it as though it represents indisputable truth or authority.
If you want to "debate" the scriptures then what you need to do is post the scripture in question and open up a dialog concerning why people should or shouldn't believe the claims made by those particular scriptures.
[center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
-
Zzyzx
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25089
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
Post #3
.
[Replying to post 1 by MadeNew]
Moderator Action
Topic moved to Random Rambling. It is NOT a topic suitable for C&A sub-forum.
C&A sub-forum guidelines make it clear that scripture can be used (by anyone) ONLY to show what scripture says. It cannot be used as proof of truth. The Bible is NOT considered authoritative in C&A.
Those who prefer to discuss or debate in sub-forums in which the Bible is considered authoritative or proof of truth are welcome to use TD&D, Holy Huddle, or other select sub-forums -- and NOT trash C&A with attempts to use the Bible as proof of truth.
Those who wish to complain about Forum Rules, Guidelines, and policies are welcome to contact Otseng (site owner and administrator) to present their case.
______________
Moderator actions indicate that a thread/post has been locked, moved, merged, or split.
[Replying to post 1 by MadeNew]
Moderator Action
Topic moved to Random Rambling. It is NOT a topic suitable for C&A sub-forum.
C&A sub-forum guidelines make it clear that scripture can be used (by anyone) ONLY to show what scripture says. It cannot be used as proof of truth. The Bible is NOT considered authoritative in C&A.
Those who prefer to discuss or debate in sub-forums in which the Bible is considered authoritative or proof of truth are welcome to use TD&D, Holy Huddle, or other select sub-forums -- and NOT trash C&A with attempts to use the Bible as proof of truth.
Those who wish to complain about Forum Rules, Guidelines, and policies are welcome to contact Otseng (site owner and administrator) to present their case.
______________
Moderator actions indicate that a thread/post has been locked, moved, merged, or split.
.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
-
rikuoamero
- Under Probation
- Posts: 6707
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
- Been thanked: 4 times
Re: Using scripture is "preaching"?
Post #4[Replying to post 1 by MadeNew]
There's nothing to rule out that version of Jesus. It's something that's happened thousands of times throughout history and continues right up through modern times. Someone says some things, people in power don't like what he has to say so they get rid of him.
Nothing implausible or magical about that.
Notice that we don't just rely on the Bible for that. We appeal to common experience and history, other similar scenarios. It isn't something that exists solely in scripture.
Whereas with yourself, when you say something along the lines of "Jesus rose from the dead", that is something completely OUTSIDE of our experience. It is something that as far as we as a human species can tell, is impossible. Where is the claim that Jesus rose from the dead?
Solely within scripture. And then you post MORE scripture as if that somehow solves everything.
You left out a word there. Probably. Jesus was probably a wandering preacher, who died because he crossed paths with the wrong people.In fact there have been debates from atheist that "Jesus is a wondering preaching, who died because he crossed paths with the wrong people"... But where do they get that from? They basically get that from the scripture!
There's nothing to rule out that version of Jesus. It's something that's happened thousands of times throughout history and continues right up through modern times. Someone says some things, people in power don't like what he has to say so they get rid of him.
Nothing implausible or magical about that.
Notice that we don't just rely on the Bible for that. We appeal to common experience and history, other similar scenarios. It isn't something that exists solely in scripture.
Whereas with yourself, when you say something along the lines of "Jesus rose from the dead", that is something completely OUTSIDE of our experience. It is something that as far as we as a human species can tell, is impossible. Where is the claim that Jesus rose from the dead?
Solely within scripture. And then you post MORE scripture as if that somehow solves everything.
Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"
I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead
Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense
-
Divine Insight
- Savant
- Posts: 18070
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
- Location: Here & Now
- Been thanked: 19 times
Re: Using scripture is "preaching"?
Post #5I agree that this would hardly constitute "preaching". If you can show that it was the will of God that his Chief Priests arranged to have Jesus crucified all you will have succeeded in doing is demonstrating that the God of this religion is the evil one here and that the Pharisees were actually doing "God's Will".MadeNew wrote: In fact there have been debates from atheist that "Jesus is a wondering preaching, who died because he crossed paths with the wrong people"... But where do they get that from? They basically get that from the scripture! But if we show them that by the prophesies of the scripture, that predate Christ's historical death, show that his death was the will of God... If we show that by using scripture, we are then "preaching"?
How does that make sense? Seems to me that this "preaching" rule is a huge grey area, and it is abused frequently by select people.
From my perspective I don't see this as "preaching" since you will have done nothing more than expose the extreme immorality of this religion and its God.
If anything this should turn people away from this religion, certainly not cause them to embrace it.
[center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
-
ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #6
Consider:
Using scripture to prove someone's pov is wrong because it contradicts the scripture is preaching.
Using the scripture to prove that your pov is in accord with Christianity's position on the matter or even to support being in accord with GOD on the matter is acceptable use of an authoritative source to be accepted or rejected.
Using scripture to prove someone's pov is wrong because it contradicts the scripture is preaching.
Using the scripture to prove that your pov is in accord with Christianity's position on the matter or even to support being in accord with GOD on the matter is acceptable use of an authoritative source to be accepted or rejected.
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
Post #7
If people use the scripture to debate a positive argument for the truth of Christianity (which DI, you have probably never done) it is accused of preaching frequently. No one is going to accuse any nonbeliever who used the scripture to make a statement about it as being false. In the cases that they debate its falsehood by using scripture, no one is ever going to accuse you of preaching, and in fact they can use the scripture as authoritative to try and prove its false. BUT if it is used as a statement of its truth, then it WILL be accused of preaching as if it has no value in debate. Its a double standard.
People don't seem to realize that we can debate about the positive argument of the scripture. When ever i use scripture i am under the assumption that it is a open debate about whether or not it is real, or authoritative. But what happens is people don't debate it, they just accuse the post of "preaching" which just belittles the entire debate instead of debating about it. Its an abused rule, and a big grey area in this debate forum.
Besides, the entire debate hinges on whether or not the scripture is true. THAT IS our entire debate! It isn't that we should rule the scripture out, and debate about Christianity without it. Our ENTIRE DEBATE is hinged on whether or not the scripture is true, and when i use scripture i expect a debate about it, but instead get accused of "preaching"... It is kind of ridiculous.
People don't seem to realize that we can debate about the positive argument of the scripture. When ever i use scripture i am under the assumption that it is a open debate about whether or not it is real, or authoritative. But what happens is people don't debate it, they just accuse the post of "preaching" which just belittles the entire debate instead of debating about it. Its an abused rule, and a big grey area in this debate forum.
Besides, the entire debate hinges on whether or not the scripture is true. THAT IS our entire debate! It isn't that we should rule the scripture out, and debate about Christianity without it. Our ENTIRE DEBATE is hinged on whether or not the scripture is true, and when i use scripture i expect a debate about it, but instead get accused of "preaching"... It is kind of ridiculous.
-
Divine Insight
- Savant
- Posts: 18070
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
- Location: Here & Now
- Been thanked: 19 times
Post #8
I don't see any double standard here at all. There is no rule against posting scriptures. It's how you go about it. I've been on this forum for over four years and as far as I can see the moderators have been extremely fair concerning their calls on preaching.MadeNew wrote: If people use the scripture to debate a positive argument for the truth of Christianity (which DI, you have probably never done) it is accused of preaching frequently. No one is going to accuse any nonbeliever who used the scripture to make a statement about it as being false. In the cases that they debate its falsehood by using scripture, no one is ever going to accuse you of preaching, and in fact they can use the scripture as authoritative to try and prove its false. BUT if it is used as a statement of its truth, then it WILL be accused of preaching as if it has no value in debate. Its a double standard.
I've just now looked over some threads that you have been participating in to get a feel for how and why you have been cited as "preaching". As far as I can see it doesn't even really have much to do with posting scriptures. It has far more to do with your claims about Jesus and Christianity that are totally unsupported by any evidence.
You just keep proclaiming that Jesus fulfilled prophesies and is the truth without providing any actual evidence to back up that claim. Posting scriptures from the Bible are hardly evidence that Jesus fulfilled any prophesies, especially considering the FACT that everything written about the man called Jesus was written by authors who were not only aware of all those prophesies but even clearly had them in hand as they were writing their tales about Jesus. So it would be extremely easy for them to make claims about Jesus just so they could claim that he had fulfilled prophesies.
But clearly they couldn't claim that he had actually fulfilled the major prophesies because he didn't and because he didn't they couldn't make those claims.
If you want to actually debate this topic you should try debating it with a Jew. A Jew will clearly demonstrate to you that Jesus most certainly did not fulfill the prophesies of their promised messiah. The promised messiah was supposed to be handed the throne of David by God himself and become the King of the Jews. He was also supposed to bring peace to all nations.
Jesus did neither. In fact, Jesus was crucified as a common criminal for blaspheme. So he neither became the King of the Jews, nor did he bring peace to all nations. In fact, Jesus couldn't even make peace with his own Jewish Pharisees.
So clearly Jesus did not fulfill any serious prophesies of the Jewish religion.
And if you want to claim that he did on a debate forum then you are going to need to SHOW that he did.
Merely claiming that he did without demonstrating that there is any truth to your claims is nothing more than empty "preaching".
[center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
-
rikuoamero
- Under Probation
- Posts: 6707
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
- Been thanked: 4 times
Post #9
[Replying to post 7 by MadeNew]
Scenario 1
MN: Jesus rose from the dead, it's true.
Me: Okay, where do you get this information?
MN: From the following Bible passages (rattles off books, chapters and verses)
Me: Okay...what evidence do you provide that that is actually true?
MN: (rattles off more Bible passages)
Scenario 2
MN: Herod was King of Judea
Me: Okay, where do you get this information?
MN: From the following Bible passages (rattles off books, chapters and verses
Me: Okay, what evidence do you provide that that is actually true?
MN: (Gives examples of independent ancient historians, such as Josephus, who also mentioned Herod)
Do you see the difference between the two scenarios?
MadeNew, look at the following two scenarios.Besides, the entire debate hinges on whether or not the scripture is true. THAT IS our entire debate!
Scenario 1
MN: Jesus rose from the dead, it's true.
Me: Okay, where do you get this information?
MN: From the following Bible passages (rattles off books, chapters and verses)
Me: Okay...what evidence do you provide that that is actually true?
MN: (rattles off more Bible passages)
Scenario 2
MN: Herod was King of Judea
Me: Okay, where do you get this information?
MN: From the following Bible passages (rattles off books, chapters and verses
Me: Okay, what evidence do you provide that that is actually true?
MN: (Gives examples of independent ancient historians, such as Josephus, who also mentioned Herod)
Do you see the difference between the two scenarios?
Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"
I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead
Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense
-
benchwarmer
- Guru
- Posts: 2347
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 2005 times
- Been thanked: 785 times
Post #10
[Replying to post 7 by MadeNew]
MadeNew, maybe this is simply a misunderstanding of what 'preaching' means. Basically, it means you are proclaiming a belief is true. In the case of scripture, it would mean that you are assuming scripture is true in order to support other scripture with no other outside evidence.
Think about it this way, if I was arguing that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is real because of a quote from the Pastafarian bible you would probably protest. How would you view me posting just another set of quotes from the Pastafarian bible to support my first argument? What if my entire argument was just quotes from the Pastafarian bible?
MadeNew, maybe this is simply a misunderstanding of what 'preaching' means. Basically, it means you are proclaiming a belief is true. In the case of scripture, it would mean that you are assuming scripture is true in order to support other scripture with no other outside evidence.
Think about it this way, if I was arguing that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is real because of a quote from the Pastafarian bible you would probably protest. How would you view me posting just another set of quotes from the Pastafarian bible to support my first argument? What if my entire argument was just quotes from the Pastafarian bible?
