Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Temple >

Christianity - the end point of Paganism?

Page: 1 2 3 4 5(6)

The Natural Way

11:09 / 14.04.08

Wow. You are one rude bloke, Reaper. In your last post, not only did you manage to grossly caricature (read: entirely misrepresent) the belief systems of a ton of Temple posters, but you also manage to denigrate a living, breathing religion, followed by millions, to the status of Santa Clause.

Not at all insulting, then.

There's no point engaging with this guy, folks.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

11:11 / 14.04.08

PS: You know where I said if you PMed me again your messages would go on the public board? Same goes for crap like that.

11:21 / 14.04.08

I realise now i must axiomatically reject raeson as inherently fascist.

You are not reading what has been written. People here, including me, would like you to share your reasoning, not discard it. Think about that, and then think why you might be so eager to say the above and the shite about Santa Claus.

You said:
It was a way of describing a realisation on an intellectual/rational level. I was describing the point at which I began to understand Christian arguments and give them a fair hearing.
...and I, for one, would like to hear these christian arguments and understand how you were convinced by them. I think most people here would like to hear about your intellectual and rational reasoning, and you seem to be unwilling to address that.

You have been asked again and again, and you have avoided the question. You are still doing so.

____
Hence Grim's reluctance to answer the questions posed to him.
____
What I am getting now is that you are desperate not to expose to the light the supposedly totally reasonable path by which you returned to the See of Rome, perhaps because you have realised on some level that only in your head is it the pure logical progression that you have sold to yourself and others, and you are thus afraid to bring it into view.
____
Grim, you need to give us the advertised reasoning that led you to become so convinced of this christ geezer and his teachings.
____
You've been an avid participant in this thread since you started it -- except when people asked you to set forth in detail, and defend the bases for, your religious beliefs.
Which, as it happens, you raised in your first post.
And which I assumed you started this topic to discuss.
It's almost as if you were afraid that you wouldn't be able to explain your beliefs, or to hold your own in the discussion that would ensue.
____
would you like to spell out how reason led you to the conclusion that Catholic Christianity is the objective truth, and that "the Church is making all the claims worth making"?

11:22 / 14.04.08

Rude at times, perhaps, but a pillar of reason and rationality throughout, don't you think? With such biting and incisive polemic, it's been exactly like debating with barbelith's very own Richard Dawkins... In a parallel world where reason and rationality somehow naturally led to a belief that the jealous God of the Isrealites created the world in seven days; and where embarassingly transparent caricature and misrepresentation of other people's points, increasingly cowardly attempts to avoid answering direct questions, and general abusive shit flinging had mysteriously replaced the tools of rational discourse...

Less searchable M0rd4nt

12:20 / 14.04.08

Grim, you need to give us the advertised reasoning that led you to become so convinced of this christ geezer and his teachings.

After issuing an apology to the people you've repeatedly insulted, of course.

13:51 / 14.04.08

I think perhaps it's time to end this game of poke the troll.

It was a small troll, and not very fierce or clever.

Grim, as a parting gift here's a starter kit for your future arguments on other boards -- they should provide much better cut-and-paste material than C.S. Lewis or G.K. Chesterton:

* Bible, New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition

Because it's good to know the texts that you're defending.

* Catechism of the Catholic Church

Because it's good to know the dogma that you're defending.

* The Oxford Bible Commentary

Because it's good to have a bit of scholarly background, even if it does suggest that, for example, the Gospels may not have been written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

* True for You, But Not for ME: Deflating the Slogans That Leave Christians Speechless, by Paul Copan

A basic, modern book of apologetics (American fundamentalist Protestant flavor). Makes tons of logical errors, but that's unavoidable in a book on apologetics, which seeks to prove the unprovable.

* Reasons to Believe: How to Understand, Explain and Defend the Catholic Faith, by Scott Hahn

For obvious reasons. Haven't read it myself, though.

And one of these -- you decide which is most appropriate:

* An Intelligent Person's Guide to Catholicism, by Alban McCoy,

or

* Catholicism for Dummies, by Revs. John Triglio and Kenneth Brighenti

Page: 1 2 3 4 5(6)