"A free thinker is Satan's slave"

[Dragon]

He defined what he THINKS a 'free thinking christian' would be, what they would have to do to fall into HIS definition of it. Why should his definition be used by anyone else if they are truly a 'free thinker'?

Because it is not just "my" definition, it is THE definition. If you are using the word to mean something substantially different, then you are talking about something else, not free thought.

Free thought is incompatible with belief driven by fear of punishment; it is incompatible with rigid adherence to a single authoritarian source, be it scripture or church tradition; and it is incompatible with a blanket rejection of ideas arising from outside the parameters of orthodox doctrine. The four rules I presented are, therefore, a sine qua non of free thought.

 

[koshergrl]

No, it's your definition. Unless you have a link that lists the same freethinking characteristics.

Which you can't. So it is, by *definition*, your definition.

Unless you also have a unique *definition* for *definition*.

 

[koshergrl]

It's frustrating because it's impossible.

It comes down to innate dishonesty and misrepresentation. You can't expect to have an intelligent, reasonable discussion with a person who is committed to lying, to themselves and others, about their ideology.

 

[logical4u]

Quick question.....................why is it that God doesn't like free thinkers?

Many holy texts in many different religions prize new knowledge second only to God. It's reflected in the way things are written in Judaic theology, "ilm" the Arabic word for knowledge is the second most used word in the Koran, second only to Allah.

Oh wait..........that's right.............free thinkers are respected by all religions EXCEPT Christianity.

Where in the quran did anyone question Allah for his decision to destroy a city? How many times did Abraham question the Lord? The Lord agreed if there were JUST ten (10) good people in the city, that he would not destroy it. Where did Allah tolerate being questioned? Where did Allah demonstrate "his" power to destroy evil (we know he encouraged sinful ways in Mohammed)?

You DO realize that Islam accepts (and writes of) the stories of both Abraham and Jesus, right?

Yes, I do, but they are not represented correctly: The Israelites are the chosen people.... , islam claims that "honor" went with Ismael's seed, incorrectly, because Jacob was renamed "Israel", when Ismael was his "great" uncle. If islam "accepts" Jesus as a prophet, why do they ignore His teaching (against deceiving, and hating those that are different from you)? Now, if you want to get back to the questions I asked, please.

 

[logical4u]

I implied above that Christianity is not necessarily opposed to free thought. Here's a little more elaboration on that concept.

Step 1 in the development of a free-thinking version of Christianity: drop all idea of divine punishment for unbelievers.

Step 2: toss all a priori notions of Biblical infallibility. The Bible may still be used as a guide, but everything in it is open to question.

Step 3: do the same with all church teachings or religious traditions. All become open to question based on the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels, as well as other evidence, such as that of science or social understandings in the real world.

Step 4: be open to consideration of religious ideas regardless of the source.

Anyone who does all of these things, and continues to revere Jesus as primary form of the God and to follow his teachings as they understand them, is a free-thinking Christian.

Do all the above, and you are not a "Christian".

"Divine punishment" will be at the will of the Lord, not man (strike number one)

The Bible is a book of learning, treat it as such (strike number two)

Study the reasons for the church "teachings or religious traditions", most of them come from many deep thinkers of the past. Curiousity is the basis for Christianity (we are searching for the "Truth" and the "Light" . We can see where science and social understandings are misleading (deceptive) to those that are not searching for the "Truth". (strike number three)

"be open to consideration of religious ideas regardless of the source." This is the most dangerous thing you have said. Are you saying we should leave ourselves open to the teachings of SATAN... (evil)? Are you saying when it is obvious that a religion is misleading their followers, we should stick around and listen to ALL their deceptions? (strike number four)

I don't know who comes to Christianity from childhood without striking out on their own (not acknowledging the Lord). I don't know many Christians that have not considered other ways of life, even studied some of them, possibly practiced some of them, before deciding that Christianity held something none of those other faiths do (maybe it is the special relationship that is possible for every person, just by a sincere request that Yeshua becomes your "Lord", with that, the Father, becomes your Father, and the Holy Spirit can bestow the seven gifts. All people belong to the Lord, and many that do not practice "Christianity" know Him in other ways and are blessed. To ignore what was learned over centuries of pride and vanities is foolish. To pretend there is a "better" way, is willful ignorance of history. Your heart appears to have been hardened against the Lord, and for that, I pity you. If you do not accept that the Lord loves you, and wants the best for you, and will forgive you, how can you, you love, forgive, and want the best for others?

 

[Avatar4321]

First, I've noticed that self-proclaimed "free-thinkers" usually are free from any rational thoughts. Just an observation though.

Second, Liberty is essential to Christianity, traditional or otherwise. Without the freedom to choose faith, there is no power behind it. It's not a coincidence that the scriptures have been clear from the beginning that we need to "Choose this day whom we will serve". Nor is it a coincidence that the Lord counseled Israel against Kings. Nor is it a coincidence that the scriptures teach us that we become free through the Truth.

The Founders understood this. They were seeking liberty so that they could fulfill their responsibilities to God and their families, not so that they could do whatever they want with no thought of the consequences. Sin does not produce freedom or liberty. It produces death and captivity.

We need to voluntarily accept our responsibilities and seek God's help in doing so. Otherwise, our children will not have the same liberty we were blessed with from our fathers.

 

[Dragon]

Second, Liberty is essential to Christianity, traditional or otherwise.

I noted you capitalized the word "liberty," which is not properly capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence, and it's good that you did, because you are giving it an idiosyncratic definition, making it identical in meaning to free will.

Liberty and free will are not the same thing. Even a slave has free will: he cannot be literally FORCED to obey his master's commands. When we speak of denial of liberty, we mean that someone has been threatened with punishment for disobedience, and compelled to obey by threat of force; or, more subtly, we may mean someone has been brainwashed (usually with a threat of force in the background) to believe what his captors want him to believe.

Traditional Christianity includes the mother of all threats of force: a threat that, if you lapse in your beliefs, you will be horribly tortured forever and ever without end, screaming uncontrollably in hideous agony forever and ever and ever. As long as that threat remains in force within Christian belief, Christians will never be free in their beliefs. They will never have liberty.

Free will, yes. Liberty, no.

 

[Newby]

Second, Liberty is essential to Christianity, traditional or otherwise.

I noted you capitalized the word "liberty," which is not properly capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence, and it's good that you did, because you are giving it an idiosyncratic definition, making it identical in meaning to free will.

Liberty and free will are not the same thing. Even a slave has free will: he cannot be literally FORCED to obey his master's commands. When we speak of denial of liberty, we mean that someone has been threatened with punishment for disobedience, and compelled to obey by threat of force; or, more subtly, we may mean someone has been brainwashed (usually with a threat of force in the background) to believe what his captors want him to believe.

Traditional Christianity includes the mother of all threats of force: a threat that, if you lapse in your beliefs, you will be horribly tortured forever and ever without end, screaming uncontrollably in hideous agony forever and ever and ever. As long as that threat remains in force within Christian belief, Christians will never be free in their beliefs. They will never have liberty.

Free will, yes. Liberty, no.

What I bolded is not true, and that's where your entire argument falls apart.

 

[Dragon]

What I bolded is not true, and that's where your entire argument falls apart.

Sorry, but traditional Christians do believe in Hell.

Now, if you want to nit-pick that they think you can temporarily lapse in your belief as long as you come back to the fold before you die, I'll allow that. But it doesn't invalidate what I was saying.

 

[Newby]

What I bolded is not true, and that's where your entire argument falls apart.

Sorry, but traditional Christians do believe in Hell.

Now, if you want to nit-pick that they think you can temporarily lapse in your belief as long as you come back to the fold before you die, I'll allow that. But it doesn't invalidate what I was saying.

Guess it depends on how you define 'lapse' doesn't it?

 

[Dragon]

What I bolded is not true, and that's where your entire argument falls apart.

Sorry, but traditional Christians do believe in Hell.

Now, if you want to nit-pick that they think you can temporarily lapse in your belief as long as you come back to the fold before you die, I'll allow that. But it doesn't invalidate what I was saying.

Guess it depends on how you define 'lapse' doesn't it?

No more Clinton's philandering depended on the meaning of "is." The fact remains that traditional Christians believe that non-Christians go to Hell and are tortured forever. That means they believe what they believe under threat of force. And that means in turn that they are not free.

 

[koshergrl]

Sorry, but traditional Christians do believe in Hell.

Now, if you want to nit-pick that they think you can temporarily lapse in your belief as long as you come back to the fold before you die, I'll allow that. But it doesn't invalidate what I was saying.

Guess it depends on how you define 'lapse' doesn't it?

No more Clinton's philandering depended on the meaning of "is." The fact remains that traditional Christians believe that non-Christians go to Hell and are tortured forever. That means they believe what they believe under threat of force. And that means in turn that they are not free.

No, it doesn't. There are natural consequences to all behavior. Just because I know if I jump off a cliff I will be splattered on the rocks doesn't mean I'm not free to do it if I so please.

According to you there's no freedom to act if there is a negative consequence...and that's a sign of anti-intellectualism (or straight up stupidity). You don't know how to think, and you don't understand what you do ponder.

 

[Newby]

Sorry, but traditional Christians do believe in Hell.

Now, if you want to nit-pick that they think you can temporarily lapse in your belief as long as you come back to the fold before you die, I'll allow that. But it doesn't invalidate what I was saying.

Guess it depends on how you define 'lapse' doesn't it?

No more Clinton's philandering depended on the meaning of "is." The fact remains that traditional Christians believe that non-Christians go to Hell and are tortured forever. That means they believe what they believe under threat of force. And that means in turn that they are not free.

How did non-christians get into the picture? What is a 'lapse' to you? What can't a christian do or he is forever damned no matter what?

 

[Dragon]

How did non-christians get into the picture?

What will you be if you question your beliefs to the point of no longer being a Christian?

As for the rest of your post, it's just another invitation to an endless round of nit-picking and hair-splitting, and I won't play. Sorry. You're not stupid enough to honestly not know what I mean, and I don't play with liars.

 

[koshergrl]

There's the dragon we all know and love...

"I'm a lying piece of shit, and I'm not answering this question. Stand by for latest excuse."

 

[koshergrl]

"I can't answer this question or I will have to admit I'm a lying piece of shit, so I shall pretend the question is irrelevant."

 

[koshergrl]

"I have been exposed as a lying piece of shit so I will declare the subject closed."

 

[Newby]

How did non-christians get into the picture?

What will you be if you question your beliefs to the point of no longer being a Christian?

As for the rest of your post, it's just another invitation to an endless round of nit-picking and hair-splitting, and I won't play. Sorry. You're not stupid enough to honestly not know what I mean, and I don't play with liars.

No, I really don't know what you mean? What lapse are you referring too? And if I am too stupid to know what you mean, then I guess you better spell it out because you're not being very clear here. So, to what are you referring?

 

[koshergrl]

Dragon excuse for being lame #99:

"This is not worth of my time".

 

[Dragon]

No, I really don't know what you mean? What lapse are you referring too? And if I am too stupid to know what you mean, then I guess you better spell it out because you're not being very clear here. So, to what are you referring?

Non-Christians go to Hell. Christians who cease to be Christians are non-Christians and therefore go to Hell. That's all I'm talking about.