Christian Apologetics

PDN

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

They state this because it is the only aspect they know they can agree upon. I'm sure if there was only a general "religious" forum, you'd find all the Jews, Muslims and Christians at least agreeing that some form of Deity exists to keep the peace, whilst fundamentally disagreeing with each other under the surface.

So Christians don't actually believe that salvation is by faith in Christ? We secretly think we are saved by virtue of which sect we belong to, but we hide that belief in the interests of unity? Are you for real?

Ok last post here. Your replies bore me PDN as they always, read, always denigrate into an argument over semantics and how language should be interpretted. Is it really the only ground that you can argue on?

I simply hold you to the words you post. You, however, blithely post untruths and, when challenged, dismiss the challenge as semantics.

Arguments are expressed in words, therefore I examine the words in an argument to respond to it. It's hardly my fault that your grasp of language is too poor to do the same.

You said "we", plural, in reply to my statement that "all" the members of the Christianity forum would respond in a particular way. You clearly do not know that you speak for anyone in the Christianity forum, you may assume that you do, but that is all that it is, an assumption.

You said that "all" the Christians do a certain thing.

I responded that "we don't" (in other words - we don't all do that). That seems straightforward enough to me.

You also seem to be getting a little hot under the collar with your replies, throwing around insults and flagrant accusations, so I'll step back to let you cool off, and let you give us your next english lesson.

I get hot under the collar when people make statements and then refuse to stand over them or to retract them.

If I make a statement on boards.ie then I will defend my statement. If I am wrong and am challenged then I will hold up my hands and say so. If I have expressed myself poorly and someone has misunderstood me then I will do my best to correct that misunderstanding. However, one thing I will not do is to post untruths and then try to weasel out of it.

Maybe I should be more tolerant when others do this. However, I regret to say that I do get hot under the collar.

Fanny Cradock

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

This is hogwash and you know it. You know very well that the average Christian, being a member of a sect, believes that the one they are in will get them a ticket straight to immortality. If asked, they will not say "any sect will do, as long as it's Christian" they will say that the one they are in is the best and detail why they felt confident enough to choose it. I'm sure if an individual came up to you and said "I'm undecided as to whether to become a Jehovahs Witness or join your sect" that you would not say "any will do, all Christian sects are equally correct".

I'm sorry, but that is untrue. I would agree with PDN when he says that there is no one church or denomination that has it all correct. Despite attending several churches and several Christian denominations over the years, I can honestly not name one person who believed that their particular building (or others dotted around the world), housing their particular denominational beliefs, was the only way to get the 'ticket to immortality' that you speak of.

Your imaginary dialogue found at the end of the quote that leads to the idea that all denominations or variants of Christianity are 'equally correct' is clearly a deliberate falsehood. Choosing the Jehovah's Witnesses as an example shows that you are either ignorant of their beliefs in contrast with mainstream Christian denominations or are being deliberately obtuse in attempts to upset the apple cart.

Goduznt Xzst

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Choosing the Jehovah's Witnesses as an example shows that you are either ignorant of their beliefs in contrast with mainstream Christian denominations or are being deliberately obtuse in attempts to upset the apple cart.

It's curious you would say this. I am aware of the beliefs of the Jehovahs Witnesses, nevertheless they are a Christian sect, who, believe that salvation is by faith in Christ. Are you saying that heterodox Christian sects do not bare consideration and won't be given salvation? Are you admitting that some Christian sects are "more correct" in their biblical understanding than others?

Fanny Cradock

Oh please, enough with the attempts at entrapment; it's becoming tiresome. Heterodox or orthodox - the choice doesn't rest with me who is saved. If you really want to discuss the reasons why the Jehovah's Witnesses should or should not be considered a mainstream Christian denomination, please start a thread in the Christianity forum.

Goduznt Xzst

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Oh please, enough with the attempts at entrapment; it's becoming tiresome.

Hilarious really. Asking you to express your opinion on a subject is obviously "entrapment". It's exactly this form of evasive arguing that I find typical of Christians, they really don't like to be tied down to exactly what they believe or what their opinions actually are.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Heterodox or orthodox - the choice doesn't rest with me who is saved.

I never said you did. I asked if you view heterodox christian sects as equal to orthodox. You have already expressed that not all Christian sects are "equally correct". I would like to know how you know this? Or is that question another form of entrapment :rolleyes:

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

If you really want to discuss the reasons why the Jehovah's Witnesses should or should not be considered a mainstream Christian denomination, please start a thread in the Christianity forum.

I have no intention of discussing the Jehovahs Witnesses and their beliefs. I already know enough about them as it is and frankly they can substantiate their beliefs as accurately as you can. Interpretation of the Bible is purely subjective. Sure you can go with the largest group and the commonly held interpretation of the Bible, but in the end of the day that is all it is, an interpretation.

Fanny Cradock

I don't see anything funny, let alone hilarious. But each to his own, I suppose!

The reason I believe your pointed questions are asked to an end - as opposed to actually investigating opinions other than those conforming to your own - is that you have more than adequately expressed the disdain in which you regard many of us religious types. Because of this, I can't shake the feeling that you really only engage with Christians (and possibly other religious folk) in attempts to knock them down. Why, even before reading a word of your posts, your pen name leads one to draw certain conclusions, Goduznt Xzst.

I'm not squirming away from your questions because I don't wish to be pinned down. My reluctance to engage with you beyond posts like this is, as I said above, based on my suspicion that you really aren't interested in the response from any Christian unless it gives you the opportunity to sink that all to conspicuous knife you hold.

Goduznt Xzst

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

The reason I believe your pointed questions are asked to an end - as opposed to actually investigating opinions other than those conforming to your own - is that you have more than adequately expressed the disdain in which you regard many of us religious types.

Of the Atheists here, how many do you think respect your opinion that you believe in a God? Many liken a belief in a deity here to believing fairytales, myths and legends. I can respect your right to believe whatever you want but I, as well as many Atheists here I'd imagine, are under no obligations to respect what you believe.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Because of this, I can't shake the feeling that you really only engage with Christians (and possibly other religious folk) in attempts to knock them down...

I can't shake the feeling that this is just another tactic to avoid answering some simple questions. You make statements and then don't have the decency to back them up with an explanation.

You believe it is a falsehood to think that all Christian sects are equally correct. How do you know this? An example of a sect that is more correct than another would be appreciated.