darby

I think it's safe to say that this forum is at best a dialogue, not a debate forum. When people truly begin to debate ideas here, IMO, people get offended. I think that's probably why people have peeled away. It's certainly why I have not posted in months and now only occasionally check in. Des, as to why a conservative might check the site out....I won't speak for everyone, but I originally came after reading some stuff from guys like Tony Campolo/Brian Mclaren, some of which I agreed with, and guys like Spong, who I definitely did not agree with. I came trying to see where there might be some agreement, and where there would not. Certainly not to convert or be converted. I'm certainly not scared of the progressive movement....just perhaps trying to understand it. Although it has been neat on those few occasions where a few of us have found agreement. I can certainly sympathize with Des regarding a debate when both sides are firmly entrenched and firmly opposed...at some point, it leads to "what's the use?" One thing I don't understand, and never have, is the idea of getting so offended or wounded at someone else's IDEAS. It seems like that happens alot here. I just got off the phone with a Muslim aquaintance of mine who helps me with some remodelling. He and I have had some deep theological discussions. I think he has missed it,and is wrong. Likewise, he definitely thinks that I, by believing Jesus is the son of God (and God himself), have missed it and am wrong. And he tells me this. Where's the foul? I'm not angry with him. He hasn't wounded me or "disrespected" or abused me. His belief that he has the answer, or "the way", and that I'm not on it doesn't affect me one bit. At the end of one of our spiritual discussions, we part amicably, and are none the worse for it. And both still leave feeling we're right and the other is wrong. Enough for now...hope everyone has a good weekend.

Flow and MOW-- Are you two unwilling to acknowledge the condesension and personal aspect of OA's response? Ideology aside, DCJ presents some arguments on a DEBATE site, and OA responds to that post with points of her own AND gets personal. No 2 ways about it. And the question is why? Why not just refute the argument, as both are participating on a DEBATE site. Is it only because you agree with her ideologically (and certainly disagree with DCJ) that you won't acknowledge this?

Haven't checked in for awhile, or posted for even longer. But felt like I had to.... Alethia--what an even tempered response. Not surprised, though. James--pay attention--you might learn something. Starting off a post with "let's pick a fight" is immature.

Flow- This statement surprises me a little. I could have sworn that a few months ago in one topic or another many on the board said the exact opposite. I thought (could be wrong) that most said they preferred Matthew or Mark, but specifically not John. I would assume many here would have trouble with most of chapter 3, which ends, "He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." There are many other such statements throughtout this entire book (John 14:6--I am the way...) that I would think might cause this gospel to be the Least appealing to many here. Also, at the time, I think many pointed out that Jesus seems to refer to Himself as equal to God more in this gospel than the others. Just curious about this, and FWIW, fow, I love this gospel as well.

Des_ Have a great birthday! hope it's special!

Des- I know you might not agree with her politics, but do you really believe "black and charming" are the sum of Rice's qualifications? Google her name and qualifications....quite a resume. I don't think you meant it that way, but it seems the left is sometimes condescending to a woman or minority if they serve in a conservative administration...and specifically, I think this has been done in her case.

Don't really know...I'll need to go back and see what they mean (the importance of words, ya know!) For instance, if one means "fundamentalist" like I think someone like Beach means, i.e., hateful, bigoted, non-caring, holier than thou, etc,. then a resounding NO. If, OTOH, one means taking scripture very seriously, as one thinks it was intended (fact for fact, miracle for miracle, parable for parable, etc), and thinks the church should hold fast to the Bible for guidance, then I can answer yes.

Alethia- I reluctantly took this, after being duly scolded. Like the rest of you, I've got problems with this type of test. I know what the test maker thinks he will figure out about me by my answer to a particular question, when I know that's not what I mean. I found myself wanting to qualify over half of the questions. That said, here are the results: Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan 79% Neo orthodox 75% Fundamentalist 71% Reformed Evangelical 61% Emergent/Postmodern 50% Charismatic/Pentecostal 50% Classical Liberal 46% Roman Catholic 25% Modern Liberal 14% On a side note, when I took the Myers-Briggs test a few years ago, I ended up towards the middle in several categories. The test giver said that can be an indication that you are answering some questions as you want to think of yourself...not as you really are. Anyone else heard that?

Fred- Bingo! Once again, not an either/or situation.

OA- I wasn't trying to slam...just disagree. Your comment was in response to mine about wondering about different people's views on the board. BTW, hypocrisy is believing one thing, telling others to do that thing, and then doing the opposite yourself. It's not believing, and then acting out of that belief. Just making the point that I think that strong, deeply held beliefs can (and should) cause us to act our our faith....to be "doers of the word, not only hearers." Thanks des...have a great Christmas! We are cleaning up after a Christmas with a 6yr old, 5 yr old, and 1yr old. Help!!!!

What people believe usually has a great deal to do with what and why they do or don't do.

NO.... I meant in both of your cases! Basically, those I have asked, as opposed to the others on the board. After your answer, along with your many other postings, I feel like I have a pretty good view of your beliefs and views. BTW, I realize when I ask that on this board, some don't want to be pinned down to certain positions, etc. It's just hard to know someone, or where they are coming from, if you don't know at least a little about some of their core beliefs.

Fred- Thanks. The link to your earlier post certainly clears alot of things up...not sure how I missed that. I would respond to that thread, but you probably know what my responses would be. You are correct about our key disagreement. It's interesting, however, that we are both "more solidly rooted in a belief structure than I've ever been in my life." Thanks for sharing. As my wife peers over my shoulder sometimes and asks, "now, what does that person (Fred, Alethia, etc.) believe?", I often don't know how to respond. Now I do, at least in your case.

Fred- Just curious....as I asked Alethia last week, as of today, can you explain "where you are?"...with this whole God/Christian thing. I know that can be a huge question...and a very poorly worded one. I'm not looking for your 10 point doctrinal statement, or any set of labels, necessarily. I know that alot of your thoughts are still developing, as well, so I'm not looking for a bunch of absolutes. Just curious because you're obviously very well read, have been in several groups/denominations if I remember well , and know alot about philosophy, religion, went to seminary, etc. Have you come to any personal conclusions? Do you find yourself closer to answers, or further away? And I realize in asking the question, that for many here, concrete answers aren't the goal anyway. I realize, again, as I look at this, how poorly I'm asking this question. I'm just always curious, after all the talk of fractals, right/left, responsibility, fate, etc., etc., do people have a basic set of core beliefs that drive them, sustain them, prod them, etc.

I'm guessing this isn't going to convince darby though.