• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why I am non-religious

Well, I am not dismissing them. You are straw manning me. I can point out things on how the text disagrees.. by showing mistranslation and context. Bit. for all the claims for being an atheist... you are approching the text with a very christian attitude and preconceptions about the texts.

Claiming that God was talking to Solomon is not "showing misrtranslation and context". It's just substituting your own personal interpretation for the Christian one and then defeating it - that's strawmanning.

If you want to honestly debate, you'll have to start with the premise that God was speaking about Jesus and disprove that through text and scholarly work. Or, you could start with your own claim and provide scholarly evidence.

Ultimately, no Christian will accept your interpretation over that of thousands of Christian scholars. The best you can do is provide something more meaningful than "I think he was talking about Solomon, and I can prove Solomon was not perfect".
 
Claiming that God was talking to Solomon is not "showing misrtranslation and context". It's just substituting your own personal interpretation for the Christian one and then defeating it - that's strawmanning.

If you want to honestly debate, you'll have to start with the premise that God was speaking about Jesus and disprove that through text and scholarly work. Or, you could start with your own claim and provide scholarly evidence.

Ultimately, no Christian will accept your interpretation over that of thousands of Christian scholars. The best you can do is provide something more meaningful than "I think he was talking about Solomon, and I can prove Solomon was not perfect".

Since I have not discussed 'God was talking to Solomon' at all, in any passage, i would have to call bull on what you said. And, there is this thing known as 'reading the text', and 'reading in context, via surrounding passages, and cultural concepts of the day'. Disagreement is of course feasible. What is important in debate is the ability to support your view, and when discussing the meaning of a passage, to use the actual words in the passage.. and perhaps cross reference the way the words are used in other context as support.
 
Since I have not discussed 'God was talking to Solomon' at all, in any passage, i would have to call bull on what you said.

Then you understand that Solomon was a vehicle for God's promise to David and not the subject of that promise? I didn't realize we were in agreement there. I thought you were discounting the cited verses of Chronicles as referring to Solomon.

And, there is this thing known as 'reading the text', and 'reading in context, via surrounding passages, and cultural concepts of the day'. Disagreement is of course feasible. What is important in debate is the ability to support your view, and when discussing the meaning of a passage, to use the actual words in the passage.. and perhaps cross reference the way the words are used in other context as support.

That fine. But we need to argue against the actual, scholarly, Christian interpretation and not personal interpretations.

You can claim that God was not talking about Jesus, but you've got a mountain of Christian scholarship against your claim. You'll need to being something material on your side.
 
Then you understand that Solomon was a vehicle for God's promise to David and not the subject of that promise? I didn't realize we were in agreement there. I thought you were discounting the cited verses of Chronicles as referring to Solomon.



That fine. But we need to argue against the actual, scholarly, Christian interpretation and not personal interpretations.

You can claim that God was not talking about Jesus, but you've got a mountain of Christian scholarship against your claim. You'll need to being something material on your side.

If you read what I wrote.. I said that was the Jewish tradition. When it comes to who the Jewish messiah will be, that is up the the Jews, not the Christians.
 
If you read what I wrote.. I said that was the Jewish tradition.

You're saying that Solomon being a vehicle to God's promise to David, and not the subject of that promise, is in congruence with Jewish tradition? If so, I can believe that. Anyone familiar with the Bible knows Solomon was not perfect, so no one should think Solomon was the subject in question.

When it comes to who the Jewish messiah will be, that is up the the Jews, not the Christians.

Some Jews made that decision and Christianity was born.
 
Back
Top Bottom