Observation:  Some Christians at times seem quick to deride every absurd doctrine that they cannot claim as their own or as having originated with them.  I close with a select reading from the troubled Tertullian: 

 ��credibile est, quia ineptum est��

[�� because it is absurd, it is to be believed ��]

Serv

***You simply do not get it.  What you are doing to Angela is nothing short of harassing and stalking her. ***

The reference you deleted was a response to what Servetus posted from Tertullian.  Are quotes from the Church Father's now harrassment posts? If Tertullian can be quoted to mock Christians, then surely Ignatius of Antioch can be quoted to counter that!  Or, do you allow Christians to be mocked here continuously, and then when they defend Christianity, resort to your tyrannical "deletions" and bannings, etc.  ?

If only heretical opinions regarding Christianity are allowed here (and Tertullian was heretical in many ways) then come out clearly and post that rule.  But don't make a pretense of being even-handed, SK, because you are not.

Athan,

Go away, Serv was just posting something to make me laugh.  Or is not having a sense of humor now a requirement to be a Christian?

Leave me alone.  You didn't need to post here.  It was a comment from one board member to another that did not need your opinion.

Romans Chapter 12:9-21
9: Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good. 10: Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another; 11: Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; 12: Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; 13: Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.
14: Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. 15: Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. 16: Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.
17: Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. 18: If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. 19: Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. 20: Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. 21: Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

I was responding to Servetus, not to you. 

Also, who are you to tell me to "go away?"  Are you a monitor now?

Furthermore, I don't consider the mocking of the Christian faith to be a laughing matter, as you obviously do. 

Bull,

You're harassing me and using Serv as an excuse.  I'm doing what I have to legally to tell you to leave me alone.  Harassment is a crime you know. Mr. Carey.

�If Tertullian can be quoted to mock Christians, then surely Ignatius of Antioch can be quoted to counter that!�

Dear Athanasius,

It�s too bad that I couldn�t hear the rejoinder; I do empathize  with your plight.

At any rate, and in case this is Judgement Day, I shall hereby mount my defense.  Tertullian was not in this case quoted to mock Christians.  I quoted Tertullian (to Angela) not least as proof that a pugnacious Church Father, identified in my above post as �troubled� exactly because of his little foray into Montanism, himself recognized that one of his chief contentions, that Christ had been resurrected, was absurd.  He then employed that absurdity to his polemical advantage.  Just exactly because it was absurd, it was therefore to Tertullian believable.  He had a fantastic sense of paradox, as I see it, and employed it well in this dialogue.  I am, at times, quite a fan of his, actually (although more so of Origen), and do wish that I had paid a bit more attention in Latin so that I could read him in the original.

As for mocking �Christians,� in that massively generalizing sense of the word, well, were I to do that, I would have both Hell and my mom to pay, now wouldn�t I?

Continuing here with the post-card theme:  �having a heck of a time, oh dear, glad you are here.�

Regards,

Serv

Corrigendum:

Please allow me to clarify.  I would have liked to hear that specific part of your rejoinder, Athanasius, that involved Ignatius� answer to Tertullian.  I can appreciate a respectful and respectable interchange of ideas, but do understand if moderation at times requires heavy-handedness.  I am only a guest here myself.

Thank you.

Serv

�� Serv was just posting something to make me laugh.�

This is true too, Angela, but not, as you know, in the sense of mockery, as was alleged.  It is not as if you are in need of a lesson, and you are refreshingly capable of defending yourself, I notice, but I thought that you might also be able to appreciate that, when others, especially pagans, brought charges of �absurdity� and �nonsense� (sound familiar?) against Tertullian and his fellow Christians and their doctrines, he transmuted that base metal into gold.  There's the proof.

I sent that quote on to you not only because it is amusing but also because it is informative.  As you will have probably noticed, Tertullian also wrote the article on the �veiling of virgins� that I linked to your �When In Rome� thread.  He is an interesting bloke, that one, and, with absolutely no disrespect intended to either one of them, I once named my nephew�s tiny turtle (that he brought home with us from a flea market) after Tertullian.

�Or is not having a sense of humor now a requirement to be a Christian?�

In my experience, it is not exactly a requirement but often seems a predominant and characteristic trait.  Pity, that.

Serv

More the pity that pointing out truth is considered an insult.  Those who are unable to defend their viewpoint shouldn't engage in debate.  It is not for the oversensitive and thin skinned.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Hey guys, this was meant to be a fun thread, from one person to cheer up another, THERE IS ABSOLUTLY NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT!

Athan, everyone has a right to say 'leave me alone' its got nothing to do with monitoring.

You ask, "who are you," - you don't want to know, trust me.

Servetus,

I did appreciate the comment and took it for exactly as you meant it.  I saw the irony there and enjoyed every minute.  Thank you.

Oh, and the Veiling the Virgins link you posted is not on my interfaith womens website. 

Ang

If I had wanted to use the �usual� rationalistic criticism against Tertullian, George, I might have brought the customary misquote: credo quia absurdum est ("I believe because it is absurd").

�The usual implication is that Tertullian believed in Christianity because it was absurd.  Tertullian thought nothing of the kind.�

Thanks.  For purposes of this discussion, I have already narrowed the focus from Christianity in general to the specific claim of the resurrection and, by implication, crucifixion of Christ (see above).  This claim Tertullian certainly does acknowledge as absurd and, because absurd, believable. 

�When Tertullian said this he was speaking of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of the Lord.�

Thanks.  Repeat.

"And the Son of God died; it is by all means to be believed, because it is absurd. And he was buried and rose again; the fact is certain because it is impossible." ([Tertullian] De Carne Christi)

Speaking of those usual implications, I can certainly see how and why some hard-core Rationalists latch onto this one.  Following Tertullian�s lead, I suppose I should believe in, say, walking, talking and seducing snakes also because, being impossible, they are therefore a fact.  Or, what�s more, develop a credo which states:  �a doctrine is believable only to the extent that it is absurd; ergo, that doctrine which is most absurd is most worthy of belief.�  Why, if one were truly given to mockery, there is no end to what one could do with a syllogism of this type!

�Have any of you had discussions with atheists or agnostics?�

When as an infant, I cut my first set of teeth in academia and then later cut my second set on Wall Street, so to speak.

�I have.�

So have I.

�They say that Christians and Muslims and members of other faiths believe in the absurd; that we believe in fairy tales and the like.�

Yes, in fact, they often do.  But then again, you guys also sometimes say that about each other as well. 

�They say that the virgin birth of Jesus is absurd, and on an on and on, but we know that nothing is impossible for God.�

Agreed.

�Do you understand?�

Yes, I do.  To a point.

�I didn't find any humor here.�

To my view, there is nothing particularly unusual about that.  Thus far, you simply fit the preponderant and characteristic pattern that I referred to above.  Thanks, in any case, for the post-card, and welcome to the discussions.

Servetus

Servetus,

Following Tertullian�s lead, I suppose I should believe in, say, walking, talking and seducing snakes also because, being impossible, they are therefore a fact.  Or, what�s more, develop a credo which states:  �a doctrine is believable only to the extent that it is absurd; ergo, that doctrine which is most absurd is most worthy of belief.� 

Nonsense.

Should I as an atheist believe in angels?  Angels who appear in bushes that are on fire; angels appearing to the prophet of Islam in a cave?  Many religious beliefs are absurd to unbelievers.

We must be able to discuss subjects in a cordial manner, would't you agree?

Peace.

*mistakenly erased, but reposted*

___________________________________________

George,

(Me)  �Speaking of those usual implications, I can certainly see how and why some hard-core Rationalists latch onto this one. Following Tertullian�s lead, I suppose I should believe in, say, walking, talking and seducing snakes also because, being impossible, they are therefore a fact.  Or, what�s more, develop a credo which states:  �a doctrine is believable only to the extent that it is absurd; ergo, that doctrine which is most absurd is most worthy of belief.�  

(You) �Nonsense.�

Exactly.  Nonsense.  Witness the historical reaction of the Rationalists, coming, as it seems they did, in the wake of the rebellious Protestants, against the �absurd� and �nonsensical� doctrines and dogmas of the house, or Church, that Tertullian and those of his ilk built.  

�Should I as an atheist believe in angels?  Angels who appear in bushes that are on fire; angels appearing to the prophet of Islam in a cave?�

According to, say, Bertrand Russell and Ibn Warraq (the later), I should think not.

�Many religious beliefs are absurd to unbelievers.�

Right.  For proof of this, just ask Angela and Tertullian (not my nephew�s turtle).

�We must be able to discuss subjects in a cordial manner, would't you agree?�

Readily.  Let's have a go.

Pax tecum [peace to you] as well,

Servetus

Was there a reason, though, that you did not put the article on your website?  I thought perhaps you found something objectionable?

Good emoticon!  I understand.  I think, in retrospect, or reading backward, that your statement (that I copied above in blue) was perhaps meant to read �now� instead of �not.� 

Over and out (for now)

Serv

ak_m_f wrote: fredifreeloader wrote: akmf - he is torrencedelay.  have you never heard of the great torrencedelay? O, Yes I have. sorry about not recognizing you (TD), hope you forgive me�.. Your majesty

As-Salamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu

I bow to God and God alone.

This is a silly thread, anyone have a needle?