is true debate really possible??

[Archaeopteryx]

I am sensitive, but more when people are attacking God profusely than when I am the target. Both kinds of attacks offend me, not because the attacks are reactions of ignorance, but because they are reactions of stubborn denial and arrogance. I don't usually react negatively when these kinds of attacks come at the start, but when they continue from the same persons, despite having the truth shown to them that their arguments are nonsensical and false, they offend me.

Perhaps your arguments are not as good as you think they are?

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

I am sensitive, but more when people are attacking God profusely than when I am the target. Both kinds of attacks offend me, not because the attacks are reactions of ignorance, but because they are reactions of stubborn denial and arrogance. I don't usually react negatively when these kinds of attacks come at the start, but when they continue from the same persons, despite having the truth shown to them that their arguments are nonsensical and false, they offend me.

I have debated countless atheists, and I can tell in a post or two whether they are here trying to learn, or whether they are here trying to be a source of annoyance. Unfortunately, not all are here with the right mentality, and I see debates with such a waste of time.

An easy way to spot them is they tend to throw up question after question without seemingly looking at the answers.

 

[WoundedDeep]

An easy way to spot them is they tend to throw up question after question without seemingly looking at the answers.

I get that all the time. And when they have no answer to my challenges, the typical response is: "Perhaps your answers are not as good as you want it to be"? There we have one of those common rhetorics, just above your post.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

it so easily can, if you Love something it is part of you and if that something is attacked or ridiculed it is very personal.
If someone said something about my wife or children i would be very offended, they are not me and it could be taken as not being personal but it touches on my personal choices, beliefs and sensibilities so it is a personal attack.

But we are not talking about your wife or children. We are talking about religious beliefs. When someone criticises your deeply held religious beliefs they are not trying to attack you as a person. (Exception: there are times when someone might be trying to attack you as a person simply because you are a Christian. I don't condone that. There's a difference between critically examining beliefs and heaping scorn on a person simply because they believe differently.)

 

[WoundedDeep]

Perhaps your arguments are not as good as you think they are?

Perhaps that's what your biased perception tells you?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I get that all the time. And when they have no answer to my challenges, the typical response is: "Perhaps your answers are not as good as you want it to be"? There we have one of those common rhetorics, just above your post.

Have you considered that possibility? You go on about how you have answered people's questions and objections, fostering the impression that your answers have been definitive and undisputed. But is that the case?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Perhaps that's what your biased perception tells you?

It could be. Is your perception unbiased?

 

[WoundedDeep]

Well, you sure spend a lot of time talking about your hurt feelings.
That´s why I was assuming you were interested in having a conversation about this.

Only because you asked.

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

I get that all the time. And when they have no answer to my challenges, the typical response is: "Perhaps your answers are not as good as you want it to be"? There we have one of those common rhetorics, just above your post.

the main ones are what they perceive to be contradictions, the majority are due to the different covenants but they just shout back "you are making that up" or something like that.
I had a fun guy saying he could disprove my faith, I tried telling him you mean you think you can disprove God exists, he said no i can disprove your faith, it kinda says it all.

i suppose some of it falls under casting pearls before swine but I try my best to talk to anyone who is interested in talking about God but some are quite clearly in it to cause trouble and when you finally get down to it they have some problem that stopped them believing or stops them from wanting to believe.

 

[WoundedDeep]

the main ones are what they perceive to be contradictions, the majority are due to the different covenants but they just shout back "you are making that up" or something like that.
I had a fun guy saying he could disprove my faith, I tried telling him you mean you think you can disprove God exists, he said no i can disprove your faith, it kinda says it all.

i suppose some of it falls under casting pearls before swine but I try my best to talk to anyone who is interested in talking about God but some are quite clearly in it to cause trouble and when you finally get down to it they have some problem that stopped them believing or stops them from wanting to believe.

Satan goes after our faith, all the time. When I first converted from an atheist, it was an outright war on my faith going on. Satan tried every possible way to stop me from believing, I was not allowed to fellowship, not allowed to read the Bible, and had to hear all kinds of curses for no wrong of mine. I even had to cast out a demon in Jesus' Name who was apparently speaking through my mother to discourage me from believing.

Satan's primary motive is to shipwreck our faith, he did it in Paul's time, he will do it now too. If we do not have a strong faith, we need to ask of God to strengthen us in Jesus Christ. I would not argue with anyone unless I was sure God is with me to strengthen my faith.

 

[quatona]

I am sensitive, but more when people are attacking God profusely than when I am the target. Both kinds of attacks offend me, not because the attacks are reactions of ignorance, but because they are reactions of stubborn denial and arrogance. I don't usually react negatively when these kinds of attacks come at the start, but when they continue from the same persons, despite having the truth shown to them that their arguments are nonsensical and false, they offend me.

You still aren´t giving examples, you still are giving the general results of your assumptions and interpretations. That´s not particularly helpful.

I have debated countless atheists, and I can tell in a post or two whether they are here trying to learn, or whether they are here trying to be a source of annoyance.

Well, hopefully you aren´t surprised when I tell you that not everybody might see your mind reading skills as infallible and authoritative as you do.
On another note, the false dichotomy "learning or annoying" might lie at the core of your - to me - adventurous interpretations.
I am not here to be subjected to your teachings, and I am not here to annoy anyone, either. Apparently there is something about your mindset that doesn´t allow for alternative options.

Unfortunately, not all are here with the right mentality, and I see debates with such a waste of time.

I´m not offended exactly, but I find the idea that we must accept you (a participant in a discussion) of all as the judge about who has the "right mentality" or not inacceptable - particularly if you take offense when others are judging your mindset or the mind of an ancient character.

The more I learn about the way your perception and your interpretation works, the more I come to the impression that you and I can´t have a fruitful discussion.
The ice you invite me to walk on is too thin, for me.
The pedestal you want to reside on is too high, for me.

 

[quatona]

Only because you asked.

Really?
Because in those threads I have seen you posting in it seemed to be the about the only topic you were talking about. It didn´t take my questions to make you go to great lengths how you are not getting the treatment you deserve.

 

[WoundedDeep]

You still aren´t giving examples, you still are giving the general results of your assumptions and interpretations. That´s not particularly helpful.

The examples are in the posts I reply to. You can have a look at who I reply to and what they say specifically, if you wish. Most of them I replied to are bent on portraying God in a negative light based on their interpretations of the Bible.

Well, hopefully you aren´t surprised when I tell you that not everybody might see your mind reading skills as infallible and authoritative as you do.
On another note, the false dichotomy "learning or annoying" might lie at the core of your - to me - adventurous interpretations.
I am not here to be subjected to your teachings, and I am not here to annoy anyone, either. Apparently there is something about your mindset that doesn´t allow for alternative options.

I don't read minds, and its not hard to tell intentions when you see a certain pattern of behaviour and reactions from the same persons. Learning does not mean being subject to anyone, it means listening with an unbiased attitude to what others say, and then examining it for themselves. Christians, being active participants in the faith, can certainly teach because they are taught in what they teach. But that does not mean people are to blindly take what they teach at face value and then believe blindly. The very core of Christianity goes against this.

"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17)

Just look at this account in Acts alone. Paul was a teacher, but he did not demand anyone to accept what he teaches at face value. In fact, there were people who would examine the Scriptures daily to test what Paul teaches. That is what learning means. It means finding out what is true by comparing what you are taught with what you know to be true. This requires a noble character.

Truth does not fear being tested, tried and examined. But truth can be denied by a stubborn and arrogant mind.

 

[WoundedDeep]

Really?
Because in those threads I have seen you posting in it seemed to be the about the only topic you were talking about. It didn´t take my questions to make you go to great lengths how you are not getting the treatment you deserve.

Isn't my recent posts about defending Paul's ministry?

 

[WoundedDeep]

I´m not offended exactly, but I find the idea that we must accept you (a participant in a discussion) of all as the judge about who has the "right mentality" or not inacceptable - particularly if you take offense when others are judging your mindset or the mind of an ancient character.

The more I learn about the way your perception and your interpretation works, the more I come to the impression that you and I can´t have a fruitful discussion.
The ice you invite me to walk on is too thin, for me.
The pedestal you want to reside on is too high, for me.

It is not just my own judgment, it is what people observe here on these forums. Look at the other Christian poster who talks about his experience, we share the same conclusion about people's mentality.

To call someone whom they've never met as someone possibly having a mental illness is no light thing. All Christians consider one another as brothers and sisters, any such accusations against any of them is indeed offensive to us. To put you in our shoes: If I were to call your sister or brother as possibly mentally ill, and the basis for saying that is your sister or brother preaches something I don't believe in, are you not going to be offended?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The examples are in the posts I reply to. You can have a look at who I reply to and what they say specifically, if you wish. Most of them I replied to are bent on portraying God in a negative light based on their interpretations of the Bible.



I don't read minds, and its not hard to tell intentions when you see a certain pattern of behaviour and reactions from the same persons. Learning does not mean being subject to anyone, it means listening with an unbiased attitude to what others say, and then examining it for themselves. Christians, being active participants in the faith, can certainly teach because they are taught in what they teach. But that does not mean people are to blindly take what they teach at face value and then believe blindly. The very core of Christianity goes against this.

"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17)

Just look at this account in Acts alone. Paul was a teacher, but he did not demand anyone to accept what he teaches at face value. In fact, there were people who would examine the Scriptures daily to test what Paul teaches. That is what learning means. It means finding out what is true by comparing what you are taught with what you know to be true. This requires a noble character.

Truth does not fear being tested, tried and examined. But truth can be denied by a stubborn and arrogant mind.

Yet when people do this, when they examine your claims for themselves, you accuse them of arrogance. Is there any way for someone to express this noble character without necessarily agreeing with everything you say? If that's the case, then you can save a step by saying that people are noble when they agree with you and stubborn and arrogant when they don't.

 

[WoundedDeep]

Yet when people do this, when they examine your claims for themselves, you accuse them of arrogance. Is there any way for someone to express this noble character without necessarily agreeing with everything you say?

Examining people's claims with endless rhetorics/accusations and no basis for truth or evidence against their claims is hardly "examining". On what basis do you question our faith, or what evidence do you have against what Jesus teaches, about Himself and also about His Father?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Examining people's claims with endless rhetorics/accusations and no basis for truth or evidence against their claims is hardly "examining". On what basis do you question our faith, or what evidence do you have against what Jesus teaches, about Himself and also about His Father?

What do you think "examining" consists in if not a consideration of the merits of a claim?

 

[WoundedDeep]

What do you think "examining" consists in if not an consideration of the merits of an argument?

If you do not have a solid basis of truth already in your hands, then you cannot examine something else correctly. The Bereans used the OT as their basis for examining Paul's teachings, what basis do you use?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If you do not have a solid basis of truth already in your hands, then you cannot examine something else correctly.

This is just another way of saying "I'm right; you're wrong." What makes you think you do have a "solid basis of truth already in your hands"?