News:


Main Menu

Recent posts

#1
Your Turn / Re: Transgender care — shall w...
Last post by Charles Austin - Today at 05:14:17 AM
Come on!
There are "normal" people who would deny civil rights to gays and lesbians who want to marry. 
There are "normal" people who would deny certain medical treatments to the "weird" people who do not accept their definition of life.
There are "normal" people who would not let certain families they consider "weird" adopt children.
 
#2
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by Charles Austin - Today at 05:05:11 AM
We can define and redefine "theology" until pigs fly. It doesn't matter. As God-talk, almost everyone does it. Pastor Preus brings his own definitions of things and pretends his certainties squish all other views.
Some of the "godless", in my not so humble opinion, do it better that Christian conservatives of the type we frequently encounter today.
Conservatives begin already claiming to know all the answers.
Conservatives begin declaring as heresy "doubt" or "questioning" their established faith.
Conservatives begin with their own "foundations" - Bible, doctrine, tradition - and reject any other foundations for faith and theology.
Conservatives reject my most important theological question of all: Has it ever occurred to you that you may be wrong?
I dare to believe that God can speak to us through the disciplines of science or human experience (wasn't the Exodus human experience?).
I dare to believe that God did not stop speaking when the Bible was compiled (Apocrypha or no Apocrypha?), or when a doctrine was "defined".
#3
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by George Rahn - Today at 12:30:01 AM
Anyone can "do" theology.  Studying theology makes one into an observer.  The subject matter, theology, is the object.  It leaves the observer with a complete sense of making judgments all over the place.  If other folks agree, these judgments can become codified through either norm or actual legal precepts.  This gives the scientist control over his study.  And a godlike sense of power and authority.   No one who practices thus will become a subject upon whom a judgement is made.  The observer-scientist reserves the right to believe or not.  And to believe or not that he is in control.  Bunches of these folks are called a public.  They can manufacture their belief systems measuring their criteria blessed by the peer group, ie. Politics.  Like the Pharisees in Jesus' day, the observers control their lives and will by no means undergo judgment by a "higher power."  They believe they can control the public, as well.
#4
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by SomeoneWrites - Today at 12:04:34 AM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on Yesterday at 11:54:39 PM
Quote from: SomeoneWrites on Yesterday at 11:46:52 PMI agree.  I lost my faith, not my capacity to do theology, or the ability to adopt a set of theological presuppositions. 

I said, "But I do think it would be disconcerting if an atheist was doing theology better than a theist." So to be clear, it's not that all of one are better than all of another.  So your request for a demonstration doesn't really apply.  Either way, I would put forth that Bart Erhman studies God at a greater depth and scope than Kent Hovind or Ken Ham.  Also, I would say I study God better than many Christians I know, simply for the fact that they do not study.  Nothing I've said so far has been in conflict with a number of theologians who would also say that they have the proper understanding of Christianity.

When I talk about theology in this way, anyone who thinks or speaks about God/gods is doing theology. Their thoughts and words may or may not square with the theology of the Church Fathers and the orthodoxy they created. Their thoughts and words may or may not be have its own inner logic. E.g., "God saves us by grace, but these are the things you have to do to be saved," is a statement that contradicts itself, i.e., is illogical.

Very much agreed.  And on top of that, each body of believers (and non believers, and other believers) will also have their own judgements on who's doing good or bad theology. 
#5
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by Brian Stoffregen - Yesterday at 11:54:39 PM
Quote from: SomeoneWrites on Yesterday at 11:46:52 PMI agree.  I lost my faith, not my capacity to do theology, or the ability to adopt a set of theological presuppositions. 

I said, "But I do think it would be disconcerting if an atheist was doing theology better than a theist." So to be clear, it's not that all of one are better than all of another.  So your request for a demonstration doesn't really apply.  Either way, I would put forth that Bart Erhman studies God at a greater depth and scope than Kent Hovind or Ken Ham.  Also, I would say I study God better than many Christians I know, simply for the fact that they do not study.  Nothing I've said so far has been in conflict with a number of theologians who would also say that they have the proper understanding of Christianity.

When I talk about theology in this way, anyone who thinks or speaks about God/gods is doing theology. Their thoughts and words may or may not square with the theology of the Church Fathers and the orthodoxy they created. Their thoughts and words may or may not be have its own inner logic. E.g., "God saves us by grace, but these are the things you have to do to be saved," is a statement that contradicts itself, i.e., is illogical.
#6
Your Turn / Re: Transgender care — shall w...
Last post by Brian Stoffregen - Yesterday at 11:50:21 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on Yesterday at 11:23:50 PM
Quote from: John Mundinger on Yesterday at 10:31:29 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on Yesterday at 07:45:49 PMFor the sake of those of us who missed it, maybe you could quick list whatever civil rights you think we "normal" people want to deny to weird people.

Please note that I did not refer to you as a "normal" person.

Discrimination against people of color, women and gender nonconforming persists.  And,central to the culture wars that are rampant in our country today is the conflict between those who advocate for and those who oppose such discrimination.
In other words, there is no civil right that normal people, whoever they may be, refuse to grant to weird people. Agreed.
You might want to talk to someone confined to a wheelchair about the some of the lack of rights they experience - and even more so, the attitude many people have towards them. I've heard them say that the mental and attitudinal barriers are worse than the physical barriers. While, perhaps, not really "civil rights" nor overt "discrimination," there are looks. There are folks who talk to the caregiver - assuming the one in the chair is also mentally challenged. 

Although, I recently read about folks illegally parking in handicapped spots - or taking up the extra space that is needed to lower a ramp so that the person in the chair can get out of the van. (I was with a paraplegic who ran into that problem. He can't park in a normal spot and get out of his van.) At least in Wyoming, and I suspect in many other states, there are no laws or penalties against parking in a handicapped marked spot that's on private property, e.g., at a church or even a mall parking lot.
#7
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by SomeoneWrites - Yesterday at 11:46:52 PM

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on Yesterday at 11:30:14 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on Yesterday at 11:25:42 PM
Quote from: SomeoneWrites on Yesterday at 08:20:40 PMAn atheist, by definition, is doing theology wrong.

Well that's demonstrably untrue as well. 
But I do think it would be disconcerting if an atheist was doing theology better than a theist. 
Please demonstrate. Show in your scientific way how people who who not believe in God study God better than people who do believe in Him.

Theo-logy in simplest terms is God (theos) talk (logos). People can think and talk about God without believing in God.
[/quote]

I agree.  I lost my faith, not my capacity to do theology, or the ability to adopt a set of theological presuppositions. 

I said, "But I do think it would be disconcerting if an atheist was doing theology better than a theist." So to be clear, it's not that all of one are better than all of another.  So your request for a demonstration doesn't really apply.  Either way, I would put forth that Bart Erhman studies God at a greater depth and scope than Kent Hovind or Ken Ham.  Also, I would say I study God better than many Christians I know, simply for the fact that they do not study.  Nothing I've said so far has been in conflict with a number of theologians who would also say that they have the proper understanding of Christianity. 

#8
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by Brian Stoffregen - Yesterday at 11:40:12 PM
I recently heard a friend talk about an emergency he had with his wife. She had a severely allergic reaction to some food - and there were no pharmacies open late at night in their area. An ambulance was called. It so happened that it came with a paramedic who could administer shots. It so happened that it had the particular medication that she needed. (She'd had the reactions before.) How one talks about the event can turn it into a divine miracle or just a happy coincidence. 

It also happened when we moved. A large machine my wife uses was to go in an upstairs loft. We had paid third-parties to disassemble it to move it and another group to reassemble it after it had been moved to the loft. It never got disassembled before getting in the moving van. The driver was pretty sure he could take it apart and move it where we wanted. After putting it in the garage, he looked at it more closely and decided the hydraulics on it were not something he wanted to disassemble. It didn't get carried up to the loft. It's still in the garage. My wife called the manufacturer. It so happened that one of their biggest dealers has a shop 60 miles away. She called them. It so happened that he was going to be in our town for a show in a few days. He'd stop by and check it out. He did. He will bring a crew back and not only take it apart and move it; but reassemble it the right way. (He saw some things wrong.) And will overhaul the machine. Happy coincidences or divine miracle? It depends on how one talks about it. 
#9
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by Brian Stoffregen - Yesterday at 11:30:14 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on Yesterday at 11:25:42 PM
Quote from: SomeoneWrites on Yesterday at 08:20:40 PMAn atheist, by definition, is doing theology wrong.

Well that's demonstrably untrue as well. 
But I do think it would be disconcerting if an atheist was doing theology better than a theist. 
Please demonstrate. Show in your scientific way how people who who not believe in God study God better than people who do believe in Him.
[/quote]

Theo-logy in simplest terms is God (theos) talk (logos). People can think and talk about God without believing in God. 
#10
Your Turn / Re: Miracles and the natural/s...
Last post by peter_speckhard - Yesterday at 11:25:42 PM
Quote from: SomeoneWrites on Yesterday at 08:20:40 PMAn atheist, by definition, is doing theology wrong.

Well that's demonstrably untrue as well. 
But I do think it would be disconcerting if an atheist was doing theology better than a theist. 
[/quote]
Please demonstrate. Show in your scientific way how people who who not believe in God study God better than people who do believe in Him.
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk