If Sklansky became a born again Christian...

[RainDog]

After the luck post and seeing how many folks thought that NO event could change this mans mind, I thought this would be a curious question.

I voted 1, I think a bit of illogic would do the man good.

[goofball]

If he suddenly believe in a christian god I would lose a great deal of respect for him and his ability to think logically.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
If he suddenly believe in a christian god I would lose a great deal of respect for him and his ability to think logically.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I said I would wager on Sklansky never believing, even if deep down he wanted to, because of his "reputation".

Yet he insists this is wrong, who knows?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he suddenly believe in a christian god I would lose a great deal of respect for him and his ability to think logically.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I said I would wager on Sklansky never believing, even if deep down he wanted to, because of his "reputation".

Yet he insists this is wrong, who knows?

[/ QUOTE ]

That seems pretty unfair. DS has been consistent in his intellectual honesty as far as I can tell. I think if he believed in God he would not deny it for sake of reputation, which seems absurd ("I'll deny my God and the reward of salvation which nI now believe in just so some punks in an internet forum will still think I'm cool.") But believe what you wish.

[David Sklansky]

What's a born again Christian exactly? Do you have to be a particular denomination, or one of a group of denominationls, like Protestant, to be one. Or is it its own denomination?

[BluffTHIS!]

That is a term almost exclusively used by evangelical protestants. It refers to Jesus' instruction that you must be born again of the water and spirit in order to be saved. More specifically it refers to what happens when you are baptized which they only do with older children and adults, unlike catholics and other protestant churches that baptize infants. It also has connotations of the doctrine of "once saved always saved", which means that after being born again no matter how degernate you might become later, you are still saved. Unless of course you weren't "truly saved" to begin with (another nice example of circular reasoning).

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he suddenly believe in a christian god I would lose a great deal of respect for him and his ability to think logically.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I said I would wager on Sklansky never believing, even if deep down he wanted to, because of his "reputation".

Yet he insists this is wrong, who knows?

[/ QUOTE ]

That seems pretty unfair. DS has been consistent in his intellectual honesty as far as I can tell. I think if he believed in God he would not deny it for sake of reputation, which seems absurd ("I'll deny my God and the reward of salvation which nI now believe in just so some punks in an internet forum will still think I'm cool.") But believe what you wish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice try.

[JoshuaD]

I voted look into christianity a bit more.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
That is a term almost exclusively used by evangelical protestants. It refers to Jesus' instruction that you must be born again of the water and spirit in order to be saved. More specifically it refers to what happens when you are baptized which they only do with older children and adults, unlike catholics and other protestant churches that baptize infants. It also has connotations of the doctrine of "once saved always saved", which means that after being born again no matter how degernate you might become later, you are still saved. Unless of course you weren't "truly saved" to begin with (another nice example of circular reasoning).

[/ QUOTE ]

That is incorrect.

The term being "Born again" isn't necessarily linked to baptism, although after conversion baptism when one feels they wish to is the prefered route to symbolize their new life.

Being "born again" is as simple as accepting Jesus as your saviour. It usually involves a prayer to God where you acknowledge you are a sinner, believe Jesus is the son of God and died for your sins, and you want to accept him as your saviour.

If you do this, you are said to be "born again" as your sins are washed away with the blood of the lamb. (sacrifice)

[David Sklansky]

This BluffTHIS, SDM duel may be the one I've been waiting for. Both on tightropes. One has to worry about falling, off into the tentacles of spaminator, Not Ready, or the relentless udon'tknowmickey. The other risking the clutches of RJT, bossjj, Pair The Board, or even me if he thrusts too hard.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
This BluffTHIS, SDM duel may be the one I've been waiting for. Both on tightropes. One has to worry about falling, off into the tentacles of spaminator, Not Ready, or the relentless udon'tknowmickey. The other risking the clutches of RJT, bossjj, Pair The Board, or even me if he thrusts too hard.

[/ QUOTE ]

I must warn you David, I have a history of disappointing all those that put faith in me. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[BluffTHIS!]

It should be obvious by now that he's just another PTB and I'm not wasting much time on him.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
It should be obvious by now that he's just another PTB and I'm not wasting much time on him.

[/ QUOTE ]

A rather curious post.

I was always sincere in our discussions and thought they were amicable.

How strange.

[BluffTHIS!]

Even though you have a certain knowledge of christianity you always have a very flippant tone to your posts which suggests to me that you might not take it all that seriously. While perhaps this just a personality thing where my own runs to a drier sarcasm at times, it is nonetheless similar to other posters here who just like to debate about anything, and religion is just another field to do so. And I don't say all this because you are necessarily critical or jesting about catholicism in particular. And it's not that I mind debating with non-believers either certainly as I do all the time. If I am wrong about you then state for the record what denomination you belong to and whether you attend church every sunday. Just don't expect me to keep responding to posts like the ones dealing with confession where you keep coming up with more elaborate hypothetical examples and pretend that you can't see the theological difference between being truly repentent for something and merely pretending to be.

[David Sklansky]

"It should be obvious by now that he's just another PTB and I'm not wasting much time on him."

I'm confused. I thought SDM was more conservative than you and PTB the opposite.

[BluffTHIS!]

While the views he states seem to be, for the reasons in my reply above I have reason to think they really might not be.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Even though you have a certain knowledge of christianity you always have a very flippant tone to your posts which suggests to me that you might not take it all that seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you provide examples of this flippancy?

I ask this sincerely.

[ QUOTE ]

While perhaps this just a personality thing where my own runs to a drier sarcasm at times, it is nonetheless similar to other posters here who just like to debate about anything, and religion is just another field to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was not aware my posts came across that way.

I always strive for friendly discourse as I believe the end result should be knowledge for both parties to consider and therefore assist them both in making a better choice.

Wheras I believe debating has a masturbatory nature of ego stroking primarily, and little if any chance of providing food for thought.

[ QUOTE ]

And I don't say all this because you are necessarily critical or jesting about catholicism in particular. And it's not that I mind debating with non-believers either certainly as I do all the time. If I am wrong about you then state for the record what denomination you belong to and whether you attend church every sunday.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is an inquisition to my beliefs really a prerequisite for further discourse between us?

[ QUOTE ]

Just don't expect me to keep responding to posts like the ones dealing with confession where you keep coming up with more elaborate hypothetical examples and pretend that you can't see the theological difference between being truly repentent for something and merely pretending to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was sincere in my posts.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Is an inquisition to my beliefs really a prerequisite for further discourse between us?

[/ QUOTE ]

How hard is it to just briefly say what they are?

And no I am not going to provide examples of flippancy as they are obvious including in many of your questions which you say are sincere.

Example from this (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=3358386&Main=3339998#Post 3358386) thread:

"Fictional scenario: I'm catholic, Friday night, I go to this high quality whorehouse and have an orgy with 4 of the hottest escorts money can buy. I'm telling you, it cost a fortune but was worth every penny. Lesbianism abounds."

Any remarks like that in preface to a question like that cannot be taken seriously and only demonstrate my points in my previous post. I would take such a question seriously from David though as he usually has a point in asking and is not just mocking unless in response to stupid or illogical statements. However for a professed christian to do so after the topic in question was already fully explained by me in that thread makes me think that you really don't care all that deeply about religion. I realize that this might be a hasty generalization but it appears correct.

And again, if you are going to discuss christianity and religion how difficult is it for you as an anonymous poster talking to people who will likely never meet you to just state what your actual beliefs are? If you won't do so then it only serves to further reinforce my point.

[sexdrugsmoney]

And to think one bit of comedy caused all this.

[David Sklansky]

Why not say what denomination you are?

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not say what denomination you are?

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think I have one?

[David Sklansky]

Was Mary a virgin?

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Was Mary a virgin?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ofcourse.

[RainDog]

I used the term in a general/encompassing sense, as it is oft used. If I was in error to do so...oops.

BTW, I protested something once, so I often claim to be a Protestant.

[David Sklansky]

Don't some Christians believe otherwise?

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't some Christians believe otherwise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Beliefs about Mary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_the_mother_of_Jesus)

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Was Mary a virgin?

[/ QUOTE ]

You should have been more rigorous and asked if he believes in the virgin birth of Jesus since his reply could only mean that she was obviously a virgin for some period in her life. And notice that while he talks about christianity and quotes various sources, he still hasn't actually said that he is a believing and practicing christian. Any intelligent person can skim sources on a subject and discuss it somewhat intelligently to some degree whether they care about the subject matter or not. My strong feeling is that is what is going on here.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Was Mary a virgin?

[/ QUOTE ]

You should have been more rigorous and asked if he believes in the virgin birth of Jesus since his reply could only mean that she was obviously a virgin for some period in her life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Be easy on Sklansky, he is not trained in the ways of papal inquisition techniques.

http://tinypic.com/dmehc1.jpg

[ QUOTE ]

And notice that while he talks about christianity and quotes various sources, he still hasn't actually said that he is a believing and practicing christian.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moot.

[ QUOTE ]

Any intelligent person can skim sources on a subject and discuss it somewhat intelligently to some degree whether they care about the subject matter or not. My strong feeling is that is what is going on here.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://tinypic.com/dmegj9.jpg

"Search your feelings, you know it be true!"

In all honestly I am not sure how to approach you in discourse anymore without a comedic element to my posts. My goal is http://tinypic.com/dmfc07.jpg which is why I favor discourse over debate; discourse being open discussion with the goal to increase http://tinypic.com/dmfc07.jpg for both parties, debating being nothing more than the masturbatory practice of ego stroking concerning beliefs which become galvanzied by pride in the process (inhibits http://tinypic.com/dmfc07.jpg) IMHO.

Here's just a few points I differ with you about in your latest post:

1) I don't believe my beliefs are important.
2) I don't believe I am intelligent.
3) I don't believe you should trust your feelings.

Exegesis:

1) "I don't believe my beliefs are important" because I imagine you will pigeonhole me based on them.

In the quest for the increasing of http://tinypic.com/dmfc07.jpg it should be unimportant what the beliefs are of the discoursers as long as they attempt to remain objective & sincere.

Asking for a credo before any further discussion seems like you may be preparing to deal with someone in a specific way based on their credo, when all they were doing is asking for clarification on yours, of which you admitted you were 'the source on this forum'.

2) "I don't believe I am intelligent" ... nuff said.

3) "I don't believe you should trust your feelings" especially when the search button is within reach and if one really wanted to attempt to gain insight into the mindset of their fellow discourser they could use their time to search x number of posts from that discourser rather than begin a trial based on feelings - which are important, but ultimately should be always tested with reason. ("test the spirits" but also "see the fruit they bear")

After all, it is doubtful Christians will ever stop Hurricanes using their feelings. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Sincerely,
http://tinypic.com/dmffaa.jpg

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
In the quest for the increasing of http://tinypic.com/dmfc07.jpg it should be unimportant what the beliefs are of the discoursers as long as they attempt to remain objective & sincere.

Asking for a credo before any further discussion seems like you may be preparing to deal with someone in a specific way based on their credo, when all they were doing is asking for clarification on yours, of which you admitted you were 'the source on this forum'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dilettante: A person who pursues an art or branch of knowledge sporadically, superficially or frivolously.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Dilettante: A person who pursues an art or branch of knowledge sporadically, superficially or frivolously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like demanding to know the creed of others before discussing his own faith?

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dilettante: A person who pursues an art or branch of knowledge sporadically, superficially or frivolously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like demanding to know the creed of others before discussing his own faith?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've already discussed mine plenty of times here and my views are well known, whereas all you have done is discuss matters from a seemingly christian perspective and pretend to ask serious questions when they are not.

No doubt someone will start a buddhist thread soon and you can surf the net and cut and paste some sanskrit from the sutras in your posts to demonstrate your erudition while you discuss the dharmas, samsara and the skhandas at great length.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dilettante: A person who pursues an art or branch of knowledge sporadically, superficially or frivolously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like demanding to know the creed of others before discussing his own faith?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've already discussed mine plenty of times here and my views are well known, whereas all you have done is discuss matters from a seemingly christian perspective and pretend to ask serious questions when they are not.

[/ QUOTE ]

So sure aren't you?

I have said my questions were sincere, if you choose to call me a liar, so be it.

You also say my beliefs are in 'darkness' while I say a simple search would bring them to 'light', but yet you are unwilling.

Must be that famous "Catholic work ethic". /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]

No doubt someone will start a buddhist thread soon and you can surf the net and cut and paste some sanskrit from the sutras in your posts to demonstrate your erudition while you discuss the dharmas, samsara and the skhandas at great length.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that is a prophecy, you are a false prophet. /images/graemlins/wink.gif