Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 23, 2007 23:33:30 GMT -4
Christians claim this endlessly, but it is not true. Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, Paine and likely Madison could be much more accurately called deists. Deists from a Christian background, free to practice their religion because the original, Protestant Christian settlers of America had been persecuted by the state religions of Europe and wished to establish a land that allowed for religious tolerance.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 23, 2007 23:53:15 GMT -4
Out of curiosity, Bill, what questions do you feel I haven't answered? And what's this I hear about you having had an anti-Mormon link in your signature?
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Sept 24, 2007 0:09:38 GMT -4
Out of curiosity, Bill, what questions do you feel I haven't answered? And what's this I hear about you having had an anti-Mormon link in your signature? : You are very knowledgeable on some things and I can learn a lot from you because my experiences are very different than yours. I would enjoy discussion theology and my opinions. I respectfully request you find a web forum which has these topics as a central theme such that I will feel comfortable discussing theology and history without reservations. WHereever you choose, if you invite me, I will follow.
|
|
|
Post by wdmundt on Sept 24, 2007 10:08:47 GMT -4
I'll take the Christianity-Constitution conversation over to Religion: Good or Bad? thread.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 24, 2007 10:50:11 GMT -4
Out of curiosity, Bill, what questions do you feel I haven't answered? And what's this I hear about you having had an anti-Mormon link in your signature? : You are very knowledgeable on some things and I can learn a lot from you because my experiences are very different than yours. I would enjoy discussion theology and my opinions. I respectfully request you find a web forum which has these topics as a central theme such that I will feel comfortable discussing theology and history without reservations. WHereever you choose, if you invite me, I will follow. I don't follow any religiously-centered forums. I tried a few out and they had far too much traffic and too many trolls to be able to carry on an interesting debate. What's wrong with this forum?
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Sept 24, 2007 18:19:31 GMT -4
In that case, would you be open to the idea of either of us starting our own blog?
There is nothing wrong with this forum. I enjoy it. I did not say there was anything "wrong" with this forum.
I am only saying that it might be a good idea if we discuss this sort of subject on a website whose theme is etc.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 24, 2007 18:22:44 GMT -4
What can you do on a blog that you can't do on this forum?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 24, 2007 18:38:33 GMT -4
This is not the first time you have suggested to me that we move a discussion elsewhere, Bill, and I have to wonder what your motivation in doing so is. For a time you effectively did move our discussion to a different forum by writing a series of personal messages to me (around 120 of them). I lost interest in that method because I noticed you weren't even opening my responses. So again I have to wonder why this tendancy towards favoring a different venue? Are you simply uncomfortable with discussing your religious views in what is essentially a public forum? Do you perhaps feel that this forum is somehow "favorable" towards my side of any debate, and would give me an unfair advantage?
I personally don't see much benefit in moving elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by wdmundt on Sept 24, 2007 19:36:02 GMT -4
Sounds like an odd idea to me.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Sept 26, 2007 20:55:03 GMT -4
What can you do on a blog that you can't do on this forum? I cannot see how I can ask the tough questions without sounding too harsh and thus being banned. I very much enjoy this forum since Apollo Hoax craze is one of my most favorite topics. But the only way I can talk about this and really investigate this is to bring up events that I have read and have been told of that may or may not be anti-Mormon and may or may not be true and sound horrible. Jason, I had hoped to read you respond "ok, lets talk about this here or here". I am a little disappointed. The admin of this forum I feel would love it if we would talk about this elsewhere. I think he is a good guy. I think you are a good guy. I think this will make everyone happy. I think you would love to discuss this. I think we can learn from each other. But if you don't want to and you would rather discuss Mormon Blood Atonement on the web forum "Apollo Hoax", then that is fine. But I cannot see the logic in it. But that is just me. I thought I had a good idea. I wish you had thought of it first then we could be discussing this further. This is not the first time you have suggested to me that we move a discussion elsewhere, Bill, and I have to wonder what your motivation in doing so is. Which is why I am letting you pick any place you want. If I am wrong in what I have seen or heard, nothing would please me more than you showing me I am wrong. Noone "wins" or "looses" arguments. We are all human and capable of being wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 26, 2007 22:24:02 GMT -4
Why don't you just meet Jason in an alley somewhere and get it over with? Seriously, I don't know why this forum isn't sufficient to discuss your issues with Jason. If you are civil and respectful I don't see what the problem is. Just proof read (and maybe spellcheck) your posts for insulting remarks and delete them if they are found.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Sept 27, 2007 0:01:07 GMT -4
But I have proof read and I was sure I was being civil and yet I was scolded just for asking the question. Isn't it true that there are no stupid questions?
I think these forums make people seem like they say things that the do not say. Once an origional question is interpreted as being hostile even when it was not, the ball is rolling and people never go back and read the initial comment. When does anyone ever enter a discussion thread and read the first post? Most of the time people read the latest post and respond to that rather than the first premise.
Time and time I have posted things in other forums. ANd people chime in on the misinterpretation rather than what I really said.
Besides, wouldn't a website that actually discussed history with other historians be better? Wouldn't a website full of mormons be better than this to discuss mormonism? How do I know that Jason is the final word? Things I hear on television from I would assume unbaised sources, like the Today Show, say things that are opposite of what Jason has led me to believe. WHo is right and who is wrong? What are Jason's credentials?
I do not want to give the admin here any slight reason to ban me whatsoever. Not even a hint of a hint. If I repeat what they said on The Today's Show, maybe that will give him cause. Maybe not. I am not taking any chances.
But the same time, it was pretty disturbing and I would like some answers.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Sept 27, 2007 0:36:13 GMT -4
You were scolded because you seem to think it's your mission in life to "save" people like Jason from the Mormon Church, and you pretty much said so in a PM to me. You can put it as politely as you want, you're still trying to convert someone away from the religion they have chosen and it is offensive.
I don't care if it's a Christian trying to convert an atheist, or the other way around... I have very little tolerance for anyone using this forum to attempt to convert people or insult their religious beliefs.
You want to take the discussion elsewhere so you can be free to insult Mormons without consequences. I won't stop you, but why anyone would want to follow you is a mystery.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Sept 27, 2007 0:53:33 GMT -4
Jason, do you think I was attacking you? If so, I am sorry I came across this way.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 27, 2007 16:13:13 GMT -4
WHo is right and who is wrong? What are Jason's credentials?
If you don't think Jason's credentials are sufficient to discuss Mormonism, why do you want to pursue debating him? On one hand, you are desperately seeking to engage him in a detailed discussion on Mormonism, on the other, you question his ability to give you reliable information. Maybe you should seek out a different forum, debate some Mormons there and then come back and discuss with Jason what you've learned. I just know one thing, I would want Jason on my debating team, even if I disagreed with him a lot.
|
|