The “license plate miracle” concept is a way of debunking miracles as chance by likening them to being on a freeway and seeing a particular license plate. What are the chances that out of all of the license plates and possible combinations, that you would see that one license plate? It must be a miracle!
…And then the Rational Philosopher gets to tear down the “miracle”, thereby making someone who believes in miracles look like an idiot. *
I refute this (in Poly’s case, anyway) because likening seeing a license plate, to a harmonious convergence of events that profoundly influences the course of life (or death), is fallacious. No one cares what your license plate says, unless you just knocked over a liquor store. Human lives have more meaning than that.
Seeing as how, throughout history and to this day, the majority of people-referred-to-as-Christian have followed one or anoter doctrine that is NOT absolute-to-the-letter Bible-only literalism but indeed relies on interpretation, extra-biblical scholarship, traditon, etc.(*), all of them under the impression that upon applying that combination of tools they can arrive at “what Jesus really meant”, I fail to see what the Big Deal is. “Pick and choose” is a nearly universal practice in Christianity (heck, we can start by how the books that would go into BIBLE it self were picked and chosen!)
So, Polycarp is convinced his interpretation of Jesus, arrived at through a process involving subjective experience of “revelation” as well as cross-checking with his own moral compass and conscious or unconscious filtering through other theological/philosophical/cultural sources, is the right one. Same probably happens to the Pope, to Billy Graham, to Svt4Him (just to pick a name, nothing personal, Svt4). We are never going to be able to categorically call any of them on it unless JC himself actually does show up back on Earth some day.
(*And even the hardest-core fundamentalist-literalist has at the very least heard preaching from someone else learned in theology, that has helped shape his/her worldview.)
My point exactly, and I again emphasize that there is nothing wrong with this at all and it is in fact a laudable way of living one’s life.
It’s just that when one instead claims to know what parts of the Bible are “really” true based on intensive analysis, and further claims that this is how one decides which parts of the Bible to follow, well, I think that’s when people’s BS monitor is activated and comments such as those made by badchad spring up.
I dunno, maybe it’s the hubris inherent in making such a claim (“I’m able to figure out what parts of the Bible are really true purely by dint of my super-powered brain” – and yes, that’s just an exaggerated paraphrase, not a direct quote) that bugs some people. The implication is that anybody who reaches a different conclusion must not be as smart, when in fact, it’s simply Polycarp’s own personal moral compass that is likely guiding his choice of how to live his life.
Just a thought. Again, I commend Poly for choosing to follow only those parts of the Bible that he feels are moral and good and ignoring the rest.
It’s just that when one instead claims to know what parts of the Bible are “really” true based on intensive analysis, and further claims that this is how one decides which parts of the Bible to follow, well, I think that’s when people’s BS monitor is activated
and Andros said,
“I’m confused. When did Poly do this?”
He does it all the time. He’s always saying which parts of the bible are hyperbole and which are literal. He analyzes it as if he KNOWS it is the word of god rather than he “believes” or “hopes” it is the word of god. I agree with Godzilla that Poly’s a good guy and he’s chosen some good stuff from the bible to pattern his life after. It’s just when he gets analytical and says that he knows what the original writers of the bible were intending that I get torqued.
I don’t have time (it’s quitting time here), but I’ll pick up on this Monday. A quick search of his posts would turn up numerous examples if you don’t want to wait.
I KNOW it’s opinion, but he comes across as knowing these things as fact. I’m not the only one who reads him this way. It’s his tone. I’m sure he’s a great guy…but he takes an authoritative tone and rarely uses the words “opinion” or “I think”.
You’ve made some strong accusations, based on a topic that are obviously a very central topic to this person - and you don’t have the time to provice cites?
You grew up around a lot of lead paint, didn’t you?
Irrespective of the fact that posts in this forum are mainly ad hom potshots what we have here is definately a debate. Like it or not, that’s what it is. Although I disagree with much of what he’s posted I do think badchad has made some good points and every time people just call him a prick without addressing what he’s saying it inadvertently lends credibility to his words.
There’s ignorance to be fought in this thread and it doesn’t matter whether it’s in the Pit or GD or ATMB or wherever. If you want to fight ignorance it’s best not to just randomly insult those you perceive to be ignorant because it just gives the impression that you’re not addressing them because you can’t.
Ben, I frankly agree with a lot of badchad’s concrete points. However, I’ve long thought that Poly has addressed those points as well as (if not better than) any person of faith could be expected to, given the nature of this debate itself . What was once a dialogue of (potential) mutual enlightenment and discovery seems now to me to be merely ill-mannered, mean-spirited, and boorish badgering about semantics.
It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. – Matthew 5:31-32
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery. – Matthew 19:9
When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.” – Mark 10:10-12
Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. – Luke 16:18
To a degree I agree with the above and if you search back my earliest responses with Polycarp you will probably find where I commend his moral system saying it was pretty much the same as secular humanism, which I think is pretty good. However, I see some decent sized holes in his moral system. First being that truth does matter. It is one thing to develop a fairy tail belief system to make you feel better but it is another to actively recruit others into believing in your fairy tale, especially one which cheapens life by putting an emphasis on an afterlife, which in all probability will never come. Also Poly worships a god who is unfair at best, when it comes to doling out his grace. Worshiping such an unfair god just because you think that you are one of the chosen is nothing more than pure selfishness if you ask me. IMO there is more but I think you get the idea.
What and ignore all that stuff about:
Jesus burning people in a lake of fire.
People being damned for unbelief.
Saving for retirement.
Following the law.
How you determine which parts of Jesus’ speech is hyperbole.
What you think hell is like.
Why you criticize fundamentalists for judging people with the exact same motives you do.
How you define “predominantly” as in; scripture predominantly describes god as loving and forgiving.
The probability of your personal miracle.
How reliable the gospel writers were.
Christian’s problem with evil.
How we can grow in heaven without pain yet why pain is necessary on earth for growth.
Why you let Paul who you described as an idjit trump the teachings of Jesus while previously stating that you think Jesus should trump the rest of the bible…
So did I call it or what:
“I think this is the part where you explain that while Jesus did command against the above things he really didn’t mean it.”
Anyway I’ll play along. First if the above is what Jesus’ teaching really meant he should have and probably would have said so, omnisciently knowing it would save future people a lot of guilt, grief and suffering. Otherwise unless you have something from Jesus backing up that what he said regarding divorce is not what he meant please cite it, otherwise I think it would be slightly more honest to admit a lot less certainty in your ability to read between the lines of the gospel writers, considerably more honest if you just admit you made the whole thing up or copied someone who did.
The above should stand on it’s own but doesn’t need to. See you forgot (or on purposely neglected) to mention the part where Jesus talks about marrying a divorced woman being adultery also.
Luke 16:18
Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Now if Jesus’ sole concern was with the welfare of the “put away” woman he would have encouraged other men to marry her after she was dumped, would he not?
Yes he would.
If his concern was for her to be supported he would not have admonished the act of marrying her by calling it adultery right?
No he wouldn’t.
I trust your responses to my other points will be stronger. You do have responses to them right?
DDG, after lurking through this thread for some time, it is my supposition thatbadchad is jealous of Polycarp’s reputation. Some people can feel bigger only by tearing other people down. I don’t like the hateful and confrontational attitude that badchad has adopted against Polycarp, and it’s kind of sad. badchad seems to have the energy, general coherence, and intelligence that could make him an asset on these forums. But those qualities are being foolishly squandered in an argument in which neither “side” could “win”. He is alienating himself in general, and that’s too bad.
Me? Although I try to be a good Christian, if I had been attacked the way Poly has, I would probably be trying to rip badchad a new one by now. But **Poly’s ** responses, whether one agrees with him or not, have been calm and polite, and that appears to be driving badchad nuts. I would advise him to step back, take a while to cool off, and then simply agree to disagree.
