*meant to say the academic religion scholar the first time

@Jack - your ad hominem attacks on peop[le because of their religious beliefs is what makes the dialog impossible. If you were more civilized to begin with, you wouldn't draw the ire you do. Putin has the same problem. Yet dexter_morgan doesn't have that problem because he generally treats everyone with respect to begin with. And they (myself included) treat him with respect in return.

You can ask the religious scholar but I wouldn't insist on deference to their opinion. I can understand, after enduring years of evangelical door knockers and religious hucksterism, the impulse to tune out anything these people say. And as William Lane Craig likes to point out, the "vast majority" of "religious scholars" are committed, believing Christians and their scholarship is aimed at reaching preordained conclusions.

There's a difference between the claim that everyone is biased and the claim that everyone begins their research with the answers already in hand, only looking for evidence which confirms their view. I believe most, but not all, religious scholars do the latter. The Jesus Seminar is one group that I believe really tries to minimize ideological predispositions.

I reserve my scorn for the belief, not the person. Therefore, its not me attacking the person.

Considering you were the one commenting about how you wanted to physically assault me, you playing the "civilized" card just shows your hypocritical nature.

And yes. That last part was a personal attack. But considering your history of the same, I think its justified. Maybe if your God hadn't given your brain a chemical imbalance, you wouldn't fly off the handle when you don't get medicated properly?(This is to demonstrate btw, an actual personal attack. Get a fucking helmet if what I said before offended you. Seriously. Are you 12?)

"You can ask the religious scholar but I wouldn't insist on deference to their opinion"

Neither would I, but at least you have heard the opinion and can place it in a range of other opinions. That is all I have been trying to say all along.

well unless you agree then you can give deference to whichever opinion you want

Fair enough.

Nobody here insists on anyone's deference to the religious scholars' views. If you think we have, please point out the quote, in full context (not just one of your infamous snippets that removes the words before and after to alter the meaning) so we might see it.

Hell, I admire my pastor, but I think she has a few things wrong and we have differences of opinions. But it is refreshing to talk with her and gain insight into how someone else interprets various scriptures and what not.

Nobody here insists on anyone's deference to the religious scholars' views. If you think we have, please point out the quote, in full context (not just one of your infamous snippets that removes the words before and after to alter the meaning) so we might see it.

Hell, I admire my pastor, but I think she has a few things wrong and we have differences of opinions. But it is refreshing to talk with her and gain insight into how someone else interprets various scriptures and what not.

website error triggered a repost. Sorry.

You kind of did, Herr Draugnar. You expressed a desire to inflict physical punishment for somebody who has a low opinion of the merits of religious "scholars".

That would definitely qualify as you insisting on deference. But hey, I doubt if consistency is something that troubles you overmuch. (And yes, another personal attack. See the difference?)

Um, insisting on respecting them is not the same as insisting on putting weight to their opinion. I disagree with several of the Supreme court Judges currently on the bench, but I would never make derogatory statements about them in public or private. They have earned my respect, even if we disagree.

The deference to which I refer and Putin clearly meant is this:

deference [ˈdɛfərəns]
n
1. submission to or compliance with the will, wishes, etc., of another

And, while a second definition of deference includes respect, here is exactly what I said.

"deference to the religious scholars' views."

Note that I said deference to their views. That clearly indicates I was referring to definition one and not to respecting them. I do demand we respect people for their positions. I respected Bill Clinton enough not to call him by his common nickname amongst conservatives even though I disagreed with a great many of his policies. I respect President Obama enough to not make derogatory comments about his parentage or ethnicity or any other thing the tea partiers like to refer to. But I greatly disagree with many of his policies, including his attempt to pass illegal alien amnesty. Yet I will continue to show him respect. I show deference to the man, but not his views. See the difference?

Holy christ, the deference point wasn't even a major point. The major point was I can understand why Obi would not want to listen to religious scholars/rabbis/ministers/priests. They haven't exactly given themselves a good reputation. Fine, solicit their opinions. I don't really care. Obi isn't going against his own heritage for not believing rabbis have something worthwhile to say. That was my main point.

[/flame war]

I give them respect in the sense that I would never go into a religion's private area and cause a ruckus. But once you bring your ideas into the public realm, I don't have to respect them any more than I would any other superstition.

And I don't. The belief in transubstantiation, for example, has just as much truth in it as the believe one can gut a chicken to predict the future. And I'll give the same respect to either.

I said respect the person. You don't have to agree with their ideas and views to respect that they have put forth effort. And your example applies to some, but not all, Christian views. I'm of the view that communion is symbolic and Christ's words were meant to inspire through symbolism (specifically, a metaphor). So transubstantiation is not in my beliefs, for example.

Thank God equally for a good test score as you would a deviated septum for both are an experience of life - an opportunity to celebrate humanity and share love. For to love each other is the only thing - the only thing Jesus asked of us (as well as the only thing John Lenon asked of us)

Thank god for dead soldiers.

Lord have Mercy

@ Putin "Anyway Obi's point was that religious specialists aren't going to look at the issue objectively. It's like talking to a used car salesman about the quality of a used car. Don't expect an honest answer. Sorry if that hurts the feelings of the defenders of the priestly class."

"You should also talk to majors in tooth fairy studies about the tooth fairy. "

And yet you espouse a political belief with a dogmatism as tenacious as any religious fanatic. I'm guessing what your telling me is that in talking to a marxist/leninist professor, I should expect bullshit rather than an honest answer?

You can't have it both ways. Someone who has studied a subject and formed a belief is not necessarily discredited simply because they have made up their mind on the subject. That was my point and the point that it seemed Draug was trying to reiterate.

I can grant you the case against toothfairyism, but comparing toothfairyism to a world religion and implying the one is invalid because the other is would be rather a naive argument. Surely that can't be what you meant...

"I'm guessing what your telling me is that in talking to a marxist/leninist professor, I should expect bullshit rather than an honest answer?"

Honest answer about what? Here's the thing about Marxism-Leninism you may or may not know - the recruitment process to an organization is highly selective. Marxist-Leninists only want to recruit those who are already very close to them politically. Sure they try to push the political line in an M-L direction, but we acknowledge there will be many who are hopelessly hostile. Christians go door-to-door and try to recruit anyone and everyone who will listen. I've sit in on a Campus Crusade for Christ meeting (not by choice). They openly talk about how to convert/recruit Muslims, Jews, and atheists. The whole point of Christianity is to absolutely convert everyone. One must bear this in mind when soliciting information from them about religion. Now, I'm not saying that everything they say about every subject will necessarily be bs. But on the subject of religion you can hardly expect a non-biased answer, since their "Lord" commands them to "spread the good news" at all costs.

"I can grant you the case against toothfairyism, but comparing toothfairyism to a world religion and implying the one is invalid because the other is would be rather a naive argument."

All I'm saying is religious scholarship has the veneer of being "historical" or "scientific" but it is anything but. Many of the people involved in this work openly tell people that if they can't convince people of their arguments through reason, it doesn't matter. What ultimately matters is subjective experience/faith anyway. They're going to believe no matter what the evidence says.

The tooth fairy point meant to suggest that there is just as much evidence for the tooth fairy as there is for god. So why don't we consult tooth fairy experts who are convinced believers about the validity of the tooth fairy. It makes as much sense as what people here are suggesting/demanding.

Yet, Jewish religious figures, who we were talking about shun proselytizing and conversion in many ways is actually discouraged unless the potential convert is completely devoted

"All I'm saying is religious scholarship has the veneer of being "historical" or "scientific" but it is anything but."

Some would say the same about Marxism

I agree with you about Jewish figures. But we live, or at least I live, in a majority Christian country where I'm subject to constant Christian door knocking and proselytizing, so I can see how people conflate religious professionals of all stripes with evangelicals.

"Some would say the same about Marxism"

Nobody devotes their time to the historical claims of miracles as articulated by Marxists. This perpetual analogy fails and got annoying a while ago. Marxist scholarship analyzes history through the lens of class conflict and dialectics. It's a methodology. Religion is not a methodology, or maybe it is but the methodology is miracles/suspensions of natural laws.

Just to point out one more false equivolancy... Callus Crusades are not the view of all Christians. They are generally run by fundamentalists as well. Catholics don't go door to do. Lutherans don't go door to door. Methodists don't go door to door. That's 3 of the top 5 Christian denominations that don't go door to door but instead live the example and pray for others to come to them only seeking out those whose minds and hearts are open.

*Campus not callus.

Well.. Even people who aren't christian seems to say, "Thank God."
I think as a Christian, that we should be thankful for everything.
Say, Obiwon, what is their tone when they say "Thank God"?
Because there's great meaning behind that. I mean, for Christians, we know that we can't live a day without temptation, from sin that is. We are all sinners, and we can't avoid sinning without the help of God / the Holy Spirit. So whenever we do something, we thank God, for being able to do that. Sometimes he/she might be thanking for the gift that God has given to him/her.
After seeing a test, well I would thank God for letting me get through it. I don't thank God in reality, because I already know that I have that ability, but for that ability I thank God. Some people have difficulty seeing a test, and might thank God for getting through it.

But on most cases, I hear people say "thank God" in a tone which isn't spiritual but more of "yay, im through." As a christian, we thank God for everything.

Of course.. there are also Christians who don't live like that. And it continues to go on as why Christians aren't reliable. Even once someone meets God or experiences His presence, that doesn't mean your getting into heaven.. It might seem like a lot of bullshit if your Christian or not related with it... but just want to say that we shouldn't judge anybody or religions.

*not christian