EPTAnyone know any good religious forums? - Page 2
| Blogs > BackHo |
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
| ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
| ||
|
ssj114
Afghanistan461 Posts
| ||
|
Archaic
United States4024 Posts
On April 24 2009 17:53 PH wrote: Coming from an agnostic, it seems to me that there are more outspoken and fiery atheists/agnostics here on TL than there are Christians of the same type. I can't stand a dumb person who takes any stance (be it religious/spiritual, atheist or agnostic). So essentially you are saying that you can't stand dumb people  . I agree. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On April 24 2009 16:06 BackHo wrote: However, the moderators seem to have taken a "for the sake of appeasing Christians who are easily offended" policy towards religious threads (as I think it was mostly complaints from Christians rather than non-Christians that these threads were in existance) so that is why I'm asking if anyone knows any good forums I might be able to shift posting my debates to. No, we're just sick and tired of the same debate being had and degenerative flamewars being had. Religion threads are invariable garbage hence we take out the trash. In future it would be wise not to make such assumptions about TL's moderation, especially if you don't want to come off as a pretentious douche. | ||
|
BackHo
New Zealand400 Posts
| ||
|
BackHo
New Zealand400 Posts
| ||
|
Djabanete
United States2786 Posts
| ||
|
s.a.y
Croatia3840 Posts
on this site, you can post a comment, and get decent replies from the author of the site himself. on several posts, there are over 500 comments about the topic. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32132 Posts
| ||
|
Sirakor
Great Britain455 Posts
| ||
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
| ||
|
daz
Canada643 Posts
| ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
On April 24 2009 16:47 BackHo wrote: List your hobbies or interests Fr33t. I'm sure I could say the same thing about them: "Discussing [something you're interested in that I'm not] on the internet... Why? But to answer your question - because religious discussions interests me. Because you like to debate about something that is completely arbitrary, something that can never be proven definitively? Here is something for you to look into. Look into what the letters that are now the Bible were written in, language wise. Then follow the path of translations. It was translated to about 4 different languages before reaching English. Now, consider the margin of error translating between Spanish and English, two of the most related languages. Now think about translation from 4 languages which aren't as closely related. That being said, in the instance above I assumed pure motives of translation. Now consider that only the priests were literate in the early stages of the Bible's publication. By publication, I mean the means of distributing hand written copies of course. Though history it is a well known fact that these priests slanted what was told through the Bible to get what they wanted. For example, "God says you need to do ___." So, those are the people who translated our Bible, originally. Moving on to the Romans. The Romans picked the books of the Bible that they saw worthy to be in our traditional Bible. The Romans. Yes, the same powerful empire that decayed from the inside and is considered to be one of the most corrupt and powerful nations in history. As you may notice, we don't have the letters the Bible was composed of, except for the illegible "Dead Sea Scrolls". We don't know what happened to them, but it is left up for discussion. We do know that the Roman's possessed the letters of the Bible, so upon the burning of the Library of Alexandria we can assume that many were there. If not, they're long deteriorated(The Dead Sea Scrolls are an exception because they were preserved in a cave, not rendered vulnerable to the elements). Anyway, what all that boils down to is: We can't redo the translations, the margin of error is there, the corruption is there. Who is to say you are truly reading the word of God? Anyways, hope I sparked a bit of your interest. I'm Christian by the way. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
| ||
|
ilj.psa
Peru3081 Posts
On April 24 2009 15:52 BackHo wrote: I'm looking for one that's not completely Christian (100% of Christian forums that ban, delete and moderate anti-Christian arguments) nor one that is completely dominated by anti-Christs posters where you're pretty much preaching to the converted (e.g. Richard Dawkins' forum). I know one that isn't too bad: http://www.soulpurpose.co.nz/interact/ - however, I have already been permanently banned there. So does anyone know any good ones where you can have good debates? rebelheart? | ||
|
Chromyne
Canada561 Posts
On April 25 2009 02:16 selboN wrote: Because you like to debate about something that is completely arbitrary, something that can never be proven definitively? Here is something for you to look into. Look into what the letters that are now the Bible were written in, language wise. Then follow the path of translations. It was translated to about 4 different languages before reaching English. Now, consider the margin of error translating between Spanish and English, two of the most related languages. Now think about translation from 4 languages which aren't as closely related. This is silly, of course each language was translated from the original Hebrew/Greek. Why would they translate from one language to another? That being said, in the instance above I assumed pure motives of translation. Now consider that only the priests were literate in the early stages of the Bible's publication. By publication, I mean the means of distributing hand written copies of course. Though history it is a well known fact that these priests slanted what was told through the Bible to get what they wanted. For example, "God says you need to do ___." So, those are the people who translated our Bible, originally. Source, please. Moving on to the Romans. The Romans picked the books of the Bible that they saw worthy to be in our traditional Bible. The Romans. Yes, the same powerful empire that decayed from the inside and is considered to be one of the most corrupt and powerful nations in history. You're making an assumption. For example, the four gospels were chosen over other accounts because they were written the closest (1st century AD) to the actual time of Christ. There are reasons for the inclusion of books. As you may notice, we don't have the letters the Bible was composed of, except for the illegible "Dead Sea Scrolls". We don't know what happened to them, but it is left up for discussion. We do know that the Roman's possessed the letters of the Bible, so upon the burning of the Library of Alexandria we can assume that many were there. If not, they're long deteriorated(The Dead Sea Scrolls are an exception because they were preserved in a cave, not rendered vulnerable to the elements). Anyway, what all that boils down to is: We can't redo the translations, the margin of error is there, the corruption is there. Who is to say you are truly reading the word of God? Again, state your source. Anyways, hope I sparked a bit of your interest. I'm Christian by the way. Religious debates aren't as beneficial over the internet because, as mentioned before, it just degenerate into flame wars, and the likelihood of you changing anyone's mind is next to zero. The only good I could see internet debates doing is giving (hopefully) accurate information to people reading the discussions and giving more insight into each side of the argument. | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
I've actually found some of the religion threads here to be long-lasting, with some good points being raised (maybe 1 in 10 posts, but at least there's something worth reading). | ||
|
BackHo
New Zealand400 Posts
| ||
| ||
