EMW

I think that I am giong to develop a definition for three types of people I see in the world.

We have religious people. Those who are educated in a religion.

We have ignorant people. Those who like their belief, and don't care to explore more. This includes atheists and religious people alike.

Overlookers. These are a lot of the smart atheists and Christians that I find. They are very educated, but are educated the wrong way, so it makes it very hard to argue with them.

Coming from a Christian perspective, it is very hard to argue with people who aren't in the Word. The Bible is very very complicated, like a huge puzzle that magically fits into place. And the sad part is that no atheist will ever know that unless he is saved. From the outside looking out, there is no doubt that the Bible is a blind guid causing problems. From the outside looking in, there is no doubt that the Bible isn't wrong, but that we have the right for choice, and there is no reason to explore it. From the inside looking out, there is just great sadness to know that those outside will have no idea what the insiders know. Crazy cool things that cant be discussed because of fear that the outsiders will stop looking all together. I find myself very frustrated that I am classified as ignorant, when others have no clue what I know, and cant have a clue unless they are where I am.

Any thoughts as to where you are in this matter?

I'm hoping that I'm in your category of religious, but I may be in the overlooking category. I'm trying to make my debates based upon discussions in Christian Morality classes, but my own conclusions come in too, which are probably a little more liberal than standard Catholic teaching. I'm in that religious stage called searching, in which I'm trying to find the right balance for myself. And these debates are helping me to understand the faith by defending it.

But it is difficult to make arguments when both sides are convinced that they are correct, and that they won't accept the other's arguments and proof.

Connor, I'm thinking that you're coming from a religious standpoint for sure. You're debating based off of Christian standpoint. If others don't understand, that's not your fault. You're not ignorant for defending what you believe. If others don't understand you, then they ought to make the effort to research what angle you're coming from so that they can debate effectively. And that's not aimed at anyone on here, just my beliefs.

As you are in frustration with non-Christians debating religion, as are non-Christians debating with Christians that make statements like, "...educated the wrong way." What way is the "right" way?

I cannot be classified in any of those categories. Do you have a category for "formerly religious and 'in the Word' who researches both sides before forming an opinion and prefers logical thought to blind faith"?

From your posts, I can tell you where not "in the word". There is nothing wrong with that. I can tell that you have certianly studied Christianity. I meant "in the word" by, yeah, "in the word". Like, not just reading it, but understanding it. And not that you dont understand what you read, but it is hard to understand the actual point if you are not a firm beleiver.

envisageworks wrote:From your posts, I can tell you where not "in the word". There is nothing wrong with that. I can tell that you have certianly studied Christianity. I meant "in the word" by, yeah, "in the word". Like, not just reading it, but understanding it. And not that you dont understand what you read, but it is hard to understand the actual point if you are not a firm beleiver.

I was just as Bible-thumping, church-going, youth-group-attending as you are. I just stopped. That doesn't mean I was less in the word because I am no longer in the word.

O no. That is being very educated in the word, but not fully understanding it. This is what I meant by it is so hard looking out of it verses looking in. I am going to ask you a question that plays out on itself:

Do you know Jesus?

Very simple question, but you wouldn't have let him go if you knew him, and you can't understand the word fully until you have him.

I could be totally wrong, but form your posts, I would think your answer is no. If you truly knew him, you would not disagree with the Bible. Religion has a way of looking ugly.

envisageworks wrote:O no. That is being very educated in the word, but not fully understanding it. This is what I meant by it is so hard looking out of it verses looking in. I am going to ask you a question that plays out on itself:

Do you know Jesus?

Very simple question, but you wouldn't have let him go if you knew him, and you can't understand the word fully until you have him.

I could be totally wrong, but form your posts, I would think your answer is no. If you truly knew him, you would not disagree with the Bible. Religion has a way of looking ugly.

You can't get a job until you have experience, and you can't get experience until you get a job.

I would like to think that if I truly knew him, I wouldn't need a Bible.

how can you truly know Him without reading his life story? i mean that is one thing the bible is...jesus life story.
you cant really know someone without knowing there background

vswimsfly wrote:how can you truly know Him without reading his life story? i mean that is one thing the bible is...jesus life story.
you cant really know someone without knowing there background

Exactly. So if you truly know him, what do you still need the Bible for? Once you read it, and truly know him, you don't need it anymore. So does that mean that if you still read the Bible, you never truly know Him.