U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:31 AM
 
36,561 posts, read 9,873,907 times
Reputation: 4926

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
This (about Mark) is not actually true.

Mar 1:9

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan.

True, Mark does not say from the Town of Nazareth - it could refer to the district of Nazareth - the area near lake Genessaret. After which a town settled in the 2nd century might be named - not a pre -existing town.

There's also the 'rejection at Nazareth' which is also in Mark. I'll look that up.

6.1 He went away from there and came to his hometown, and his disciples followed him. 2 And on the Sabbath he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things? What is the wisdom given to him? How are such mighty works done by his hands? 3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him. 4 And Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor, except in his hometown and among his relatives and in his own household.” 5 And he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and healed them. 6 And he marveled because of their unbelief.

Mark mentions his hometown, but doesn't name it. Matthew and Luke assume that it is Nazareth.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-05-2019 at 09:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:32 AM
 
8,547 posts, read 3,349,389 times
Reputation: 21914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
Why don't you look at the videos and show where they are wrong?
Because they don't interest me, Rafius.

I can't prove my beliefs, and I'm not really interested in trying.

Because you're also not interested in listening.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:34 AM
 
8,547 posts, read 3,349,389 times
Reputation: 21914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
Why does that seem curious to you? When I protested against blood sports in th UK, I went to fox-hunts. Where else would I go?
Others who are interested in the welfare of animals might volunteer their time with wildlife rehab.


They position themselves, "for", rather than "against" and they don't surround themselves with what they are against, but rather what they are for.

Maybe work toward a fox sanctuary, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:39 AM
 
36,561 posts, read 9,873,907 times
Reputation: 4926
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
I'm not saying anything about bias, (not sure what you mean) I'm noting that some people fight FOR stuff, and some people fight AGAINST stuff.

There was this guy years ago, at a local Lakeside park called Hippie Hollow. It was a nudist park, but don't get your hopes up, most of what you could see there you'd wish you could unsee.

There was this guy who spent every weekend there, with huge banners denouncing nudity, and denouncing the park in general and he'd shout at the crowd at varying intervals.

They pretty much went on partying and doing whatever, with their unattractive naked selves.

For someone who is against nudity, it's curious he'd spend every single weekend there, purposely surrounding himself with nudists.

Anyway, that crossed my mind when I opened this thread.
"I'm noting that some people fight FOR stuff, and some people fight AGAINST stuff."

That is what 'bias' is. Unbiased discussion looks at the evidence whether it is for or against.

If you were not playing the Bias card, why even mention it?

Your example is quite a nice example of the (fallacious) use of analogy as evidence. One might also use an analogy of someone parading with a banner day after day protesting about racial , gender or indeed religious discrimination. Does that make them wrong? The validity of the case, not people that don't do stuff protesting about it, is what validates it, or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:42 AM
 
3,173 posts, read 991,162 times
Reputation: 615
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
Because they don't interest me, Rafius.

I can't prove my beliefs, and I'm not really interested in trying.

Because you're also not interested in listening.
Typical xian. Not interested in truth
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:46 AM
 
8,547 posts, read 3,349,389 times
Reputation: 21914
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER View Post
"I'm noting that some people fight FOR stuff, and some people fight AGAINST stuff."

That is what 'bias' is. Unbiased discussion looks at the evidence whether it is for or against.

If you were not playing the Bias card, why even mention it?

Your example is quite a nice example of the (fallacious) use of analogy as evidence. One might also use an analogy of someone parading with a banner day after day protesting about racial , gender or indeed religious discrimination. Does that make them wrong? The validity of the case, not people that don't do stuff protesting about it, is what validates it, or not.


It doesn't make anyone WRONG, transponder.

It makes them someone who fights against instead of for.

I think people who fight against are so entrenched in it they have no idea it's a choice to focus their energies on things they are for.

That whole light a single candle thing. Unless, of course, the entire motivation is that you enjoy cursing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:49 AM
 
229 posts, read 39,176 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
There are these two personality types.

There are people who position themselves by what they're "for". Whatever that might be. And they surround themselves with people who are also "for" those things, and if it's a cause (say, wildlife rehab) they do it.

Then there are other people, who look around for something they are "against". They define themselves not by what they are "for", but rather, what they are against. And they rally with others who are also against that, and spend their time deriding those who believe in whatever that is. They spend a great deal of time making fun of people who are "for" something, and tearing down their causes.

Just an observation. Everyone defines themselves in some way. I know what I'm "for". I guess you're clear what you're "against", OP.
There is an old saying, probably as old as Plato, but coined as Miles' Law during the Truman era....

"Where you stand depends on where you sit."

I find that applies pretty well to a host of human interactions. From where you sit, you see the OP (and perhaps the majority of posts in this subforum) as being "against" something. From where I sit, I see them as being very much "for" something. Rafius can speak for himself, and has... but I see him as being FOR things like truth, reason, logic, evidence-based beliefs, clear-eyed unsentimental analysis, etc.

Just an observation. Everyone defines themselves in some way. You seem to define yourself in such a way that those who do not automatically support your beliefs are insulting, attacking, deriding, making fun, tearing down, wasting time, and so on. Where you stand depends on where you sit.

Last edited by HeelaMonster; 03-05-2019 at 10:16 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:54 AM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
14,554 posts, read 9,986,148 times
Reputation: 2502
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
Because they don't interest me, Rafius.
So you are not interested in whether or not what you believe is true??

Quote:
I can't prove my beliefs, and I'm not really interested in trying.
Does that mean that you are not interested in whether what you believe is true or not?

Quote:
Because you're also not interested in listening.
No. That is the usual cop-out that we hear from Christians all the time. 'I'm not going to present my evidence because you won't believe it anyway.' Rubbish! All you have to do is present verifiable evidence that what you believe is true and I cannot but accept and believe it...because I accept and believe what is verifiable true. I don't want to believe that people buy the records of Leonard Cohen but I am forced to accept that they do because that is what the verifiable evidence shows...if you see what I mean.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
Others who are interested in the welfare of animals might volunteer their time with wildlife rehab.
...and how does that put a stop to fox-hunting? That's like saying - 'I'll go and work in the hospital but I'm not interested in stopping the war.'

Quote:
Maybe work toward a fox sanctuary, etc
Again, how does that stop fox-hunting? You think it's better to waste time and effort by rescuing and caring for foxes that have been injured by hunting, rather than to prevent them being injured in the first place?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:58 AM
 
36,561 posts, read 9,873,907 times
Reputation: 4926
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
Because they don't interest me, Rafius.

I can't prove my beliefs, and I'm not really interested in trying.

Because you're also not interested in listening.
Oh, we would be. Anyone (like old Pneuma, who was pretty good at it) who contests what we conclude is worth listening to. Of course, if nobody wants to do so, it makes it easier for us. It also makes it easier for them to ignore us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
It doesn't make anyone WRONG, transponder.

It makes them someone who fights against instead of for.

I think people who fight against are so entrenched in it they have no idea it's a choice to focus their energies on things they are for.

That whole light a single candle thing. Unless, of course, the entire motivation is that you enjoy cursing.
Still referring bias. Looking at the merits or demerits of a case is what counts, not using bias as a reason to say 'I see no point in listening to you or even talking to you' which is effectively what you are doing here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
Others who are interested in the welfare of animals might volunteer their time with wildlife rehab.


They position themselves, "for", rather than "against" and they don't surround themselves with what they are against, but rather what they are for.

Maybe work toward a fox sanctuary, etc.
But that is merely treating the injuries while leaving people free to inflict injury. It should be about cure, not treating the symptoms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2019, 09:59 AM
 
8,547 posts, read 3,349,389 times
Reputation: 21914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
So you are not interested in whether or not what you believe is true??

Does that mean that you are not interested in whether what you believe is true or not?

No. That is the usual cop-out that we hear from Christians all the time. 'I'm not going to present my evidence because because you won't believe it anyway.' Rubbish! All you have to do is present verifiable evidence that what you believe is true and I cannot but accept and believe it. Can you do it?

...and how does that put a stop to fox-hunting? That's like saying - 'I'll go and work in the hospital but I'm not interested in stopping the war.'

Again, how does that stop fox-hunting? You think it's better to waste time and effort by rescuing and caring for foxes that have been injured by hunting, rather than to prevent them being injured in the first place?
If you're interested in the safety of foxes, working for a foundation that buys up large tracts of land and prohibits fox hunting would most likely do more good than you yelling at fox hunters. Unless, of course, what you enjoy is yelling at people you disagree with rather than working quietly toward something you agree with.

And for the rest of this, I tend not to try to waste my time talking to people who are clearly not interested in what I have to say.

They're just looking for a canvas of thoughts to further disagree with.

So, yeah.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top