« first day (668 days earlier)      last day (3968 days later) » 
01:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

8:00 PM
i dont really learn anything answering questions
 
@JonEricson Some say that the only way you pass Chemistry is to do the homework.
 
i just draw from what i've already learned
if i dont already know the answer i dont attempt
 
Got any credible sources?
 
@caseyr547 that's my approach typically as well.
 
@caseyr547 You have to understand that this site values researched answers over anything else. Part of the reason many of us work in technical fields.
 
8:01 PM
I'm not real prolific on the main site, and I don't have a lot of rep for it.
but when I do answer, I'm gonna go find sources that support my answer,
 
@Anonymous I read "Christianity" the first time. It's true there too. ;-)
 
even if it's just wikipedia (though I try to have at least one better source)
 
@waxeagle Hmmm... isn't that confirmation bias? (Seek and ye shall find.)
 
the Bible and strongs are the main sources i use
 
@waxeagle The most valuable part of Wikipedia is the bibliography section.
 
8:03 PM
@Anonymous it's I know the answer, but don't take my word for it.
 
@caseyr547 That's great. I use the Bible quite a bit myself.
 
@caseyr547 The Bible is a complex document. To understand the Bible, one may want to seek a critical approach.
 
not really @Anonymous
 
@Anonymous commentaries are great for this and several are freely available
 
it was written for the mentally weak
those outcast by the world
 
8:05 PM
@caseyr547 um we have a whole site devoted to understanding it.
 
@caseyr547 Well, the Bible is really quite various. ;-)
@waxeagle You don't say. ;-)
 
@JonEricson ancient texts are ancient yo :)
 
I would prefer that hermeneutics is studied by biblical scholars in universities and colleges.
And not the fundamentalist type of college.
 
@waxeagle most of the texts of the new testament were written in common language of the day
 
ok, pool time. see y'all later...
@caseyr547 key word the day
 
8:07 PM
i think the peters were written in a higher form of greek
 
@caseyr547 Classical Greek?
 
let me google @Anonymous
 
@Anonymous FYI: BH has some very strong (albeit young) scholars contributing every day. I am constantly impressed by the quality of their answers.
@caseyr547 Yep koine means "common":
Koine (from "common", also known as Alexandrian dialect, common Attic or Hellenistic Greek) was the common supra-regional form of Greek spoken and written during hellenistic and Roman antiquity. It developed through the spread of Greek following the conquests of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC, and served as the common lingua franca of much of the Mediterranean region and the Middle East during the following centuries. Based mainly on Attic and related Ionic speech forms, with various admixtures brought about through dialect levelling with other varieties, Koiné Greek display...
 
yes
 
@JonEricson How did you embed that Wikipedia link?
 
8:10 PM
Stylistic Problems. This is often the straw that breaks the camel’s back for those wrestling with the authenticity issue. First and foremost, the stylistic differences between 1 Peter and 2 Peter are so great (1 Peter being relatively good Greek, 2 Peter being relatively poor Greek) that to
suppose that one man penned both letters—and both within perhaps a few months’ time and to the same audience (as 3:1 suggests)—stretches credibility to the breaking point. Further, the Greek of 2 Peter is stilted and, with its high proportion of hapax legomena8 it gives the impression of having been learned from books
rather than from life.9 This first consideration argues against the same author for both 1 and 2 Peter; this second consideration argues specifically against Petrine authorship for 2 Peter.
 
@Anonymous Copy and paste. ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koine_Greek
 
thats what i reffered to
 
@caseyr547 This would be a good start to a self-answered question on BH.SE. Just mind the formatting and be prepared to bring in the evidence!
 
no i've had enough down votes today
 
@JonEricson That sounds like original research. Hmmm...
 
8:12 PM
@caseyr547 Have you seen the second answer I wrote to your Area 51 proposal?
@Anonymous Original research is allowed on BH.SE. Original opinion is not.
 
@JonEricson yeah i read it
it sounded kind
thank you
 
@caseyr547 I feel for you. I know what it's like to have a passion stifled.
 
@JonEricson I think all research should be peer reviewed like in academia.
 
But I think that you need to take a deep breath and re-evaluate things.
 
It's easy to get crazy ideas otherwise.
 
8:16 PM
@Anonymous On SE, we have peer review. As I said, many of our contributors have academic backgrounds in some sort of Biblical studies.
 
One big mistake from my experience is reading the Bible out of context.
 
yeah well you've noticed i dont randomly take rebuke espcially from people i dont know or who make questionable decisions
if you say you dont listen to caleb and waxegel unless you are compelled to
that would be correct
and i also completely ignore david st whatwever
 
@Anonymous Tell me about it:
-6
A: Why does God say he only revealed his name, Yahweh, to Moses?

Ron MaimonThe reason is that there were (at least) two independent narratives for Genesis and Exodus that are combined to make the modern text. The Elohist narrative does not use Yahweh until Exodus 6:2, while the Jahwist narrative uses Yahweh throughout. The two narratives are clearly distinguished, and ...

@caseyr547 That is a huge mistake.
@caseyr547 Ditto.
 
just becuase someone is popular or even orthodoxically correct doesn't mean their character is correct
 
@JonEricson Better example. ^^
 
8:19 PM
Who is 10015558?
 
@Anonymous My own post. Hmmm... Was that bug/unplanned feature fixed?
Or did I screw it up.
@caseyr547 I submit that you have unfairly judged @waxeagle and @Caleb.
 
in this case i am absolutly certain i have not passed judgment over them
 
What can you do with a degree in Biblical studies or Theology? I have read that a degree in Religious studies is not going fare well in today's economy.
 
@Anonymous Some of them become programmers. ;-)
 
how they treat people absolutly is not consent with how believers should treat nonbelievers
or even fellow believers
 
@JonEricson Computer programming and religion do not seem to go well together, unless someone makes a software that is helpful for religion in some way.
 
@Anonymous You'd be surprised. But that's a topic for another time.
@caseyr547 Well, they (and I too) have made mistakes.
 
no they systematicly make mistakes
they say welcome to christianity.se your question is now closed
then they leave
 
I think I am going to be the proofreader then, changing first person to third person.
 
they dont even apologize that the person misunderstood
and when i apologize for the misunderstanding i'm chatised
chastised
i understand the main se sight treating people like dirt and calling people dirt
 
8:27 PM
@caseyr547 Those are Stack Exchange values. You may be right that they can't be reconciled with Christian values.
 
you could apologize
you could help the person fix thier question actively
 
@caseyr547 Yes. That's something that we need more people to do.
 
well i am specificly forbidden from doing it
and the people who could are too mean to actually do any good
heres my post in meta good luck downvote
vote to close
the se isnt inherintly antichristian
but the way we implement here is
 
How old is caseyr547?
So many typos.
 
@caseyr547 I don't think you really understand the purpose of downvotes and closures.
 
8:35 PM
@Anonymous old enough to have dyslexia? compassion much?
 
@Anonymous Like you, he's declined to say.
 
@caseyr547 People with dyslexia may be good at speaking than at writing.
 
#thingwhichicopewith
 
@Anonymous There's no need for proper spelling and what not on chat.
 
@JonEricson But they surely make it easier on the reader.
Reading medieval manuscripts in Latin is torture.
So many abbreviations.
 
8:39 PM
@Anonymous Or any other ancient manuscript. Punctuation is handy.
 
I think caseyr547 is new to the online experience.
 
@Anonymous (He's still here and can hear us. In any case, no need to be rude.)
@caseyr547 That must be an extra handicap. I know there are at least two users who have hearing disabilities. That seems more workable on this site. I admire your persistence.
 
I appreciate that caseyr547 puts a lot of effort in writing. Effort is a good thing.
 
Well, the twins are making noise and I have duties to attend to. Play nice!
 
thanks @JonEricson
 
8:46 PM
caseyr547: so, how did you get interested in the Bible and Christianity?
 
i've always been
i met Jesus when i was little
4 or 5
 
Oh.
 
when did you meet Jesus
 
What do you mean by "meeting Jesus"? Can you explain?
 
I made Him my King and Friend chose to follow Him dedicated my life to his service whatever phrase you want to choose
 
8:48 PM
Oh. Jesus became your lord and savior.
 
yeah
when did you meet Jesus
 
Have you ever sung "Jesus love me"?
 
yep
 
I think it's a fairly popular and old Christian children's song.
From what you said, it seems that your family does not believe in infant baptism.
 
yeah most protestants do not
 
8:54 PM
In some Christian traditions, the infant is baptized shortly after birth, and the parents are told to raise the child Christian.
I believe infant baptism occurs in Lutheran, Methodist, Anglican, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Presbyterian, United Church of Christ churches.
Baptists are known for Believer's Baptism. Are you a baptist?
 
no i'm not baptist but i have been baptised
 
In which denomination?
Evangelical? Pentecostal? Fundamentalist?
Charismatic?
 
my classification goes like this
Evangelical, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Word of Faith
 
So, you are saying that you are Evangelical, Pentecostal, Charismatic and Word of Faith?
 
some groups are subsets of others
so yes if you asked any of those groups to stand up
i would stand up
 
9:04 PM
So, have you done any anointing of the sick?
 
@waxeagle Actually I like the way scoping is done here (but I'm odd).
Anyway, blasphemy is fun. (Actually, my thoughts about blasphemy are complicated. Must write something about it one day.)
 
@Anonymous i've laid hands on the sick yes
 
@TRiG You say that you are an atheist now, former Jehovah's Witness.
 
@Anonymous Aye.
 
I think atheism by itself would constitute blasphemy.
@TRiG Do you think you still live in the kingdom of God though, even though you are an atheist?
 
9:11 PM
@Anonymous I do not understand that question as written.
 
In other words, do you still do what God tells you to do? Help people, serve others well, give to charity, and the like?
 
@Anonymous Who is this God of whom you speak? ;)
Seriously, I do have ethical principles by which I fail to live (of course). But I don't associate them with anything divine.
 
The God of the Jehovah's Witnesses?
@TRiG Yep, it sounds like you are still living in the kingdom of God without recognizing God.
 
They have not to think if something is a sin or not. I certainly don't worry about "sin", but I do put a fair bit of time (not enough, probably) into thinking about ethics. How does my lifestyle, the way I spend my time, the way I spend my money, the way I make my money affect the world as a whole? And how do my interpersonal reactions affect those around me? Should I boycott this company or that company which has engaged in unethical business practices? This stuff is complicated. (But I do get to think for myself, and to learn from others.) — TRiG Jul 28 '12 at 18:55
 
I come to the conclusion that no matter what faith people are, they usually express roughly the same thing.
Usually something central to human nature.
And that includes atheists.
 
9:17 PM
@Anonymous Well, yes and no. I think Christians and atheists express very different things on some subjects; perhaps similar on others.
 
@TRiG I meant to refer to the structure of the worldview.
Not really the exact beliefs.
 
@Anonymous I actually think that can be quite different too. (The most notable difference is probably in sexual ethics, but that's not due to a difference of opinion about sex: it's due to completely incompatible fundamentals which merely has its most obvious and most easily discussed result in sexual ethics. A person could talk about Christian sexual ethics for a very very long time before the phrase informed consent was mentioned, for example.)
 
@TRiG Huh?
Informed consent?
From a Roman Catholic point-of-view on marriage, there is a long list of informed consent. I'm not sure what you are trying to point out here.
 
@Anonymous I think Conservative Christian sexual ethics and secular humanist sexual ethics are very very different. Secular humanist sexual ethics start, finish, and centre on the principle of informed consent. Conservative Christian sexual ethics ... don't. And I don't think this is because of a different view of sex, per se. I think it's because of very very different starting points in the approach to ethical reasoning.
So I think you're basically wrong to say that the worldviews are fundamentally the same. They actually aren't.
And I'm not saying that informed consent is completely alien to Christian sexual ethics (even to Conservative Christian sexual ethics), but it certainly isn't centred the same way as it is in most secular humanist systems of sexual ethics.
 
@TRiG The Roman Catholic church does stress a lot on consent. Otherwise, the marriage would be considered invalid.
 
9:31 PM
@JonEricson Next time use : as your delimiter rather than @ and you'll be good to go.
 
@fredsbend Aye, there is. And that was, largely, the point I was making.
 
@TRiG I think you are conflating atheism and secular humanism. Although the two does go well together, not all atheists are secular humanists, as secular humanism is more of a Western philosophy. A Chinese atheist may draw principles from Confucianism.
And Confucianism is much older than Christianity.
 
@Anonymous Well, atheism, qua atheism, doesn't have a position on sexual ethics or any other kind of ethics, which is why I deliberately narrowed the discussion to be about the specific type of atheism with which I am familiar.
 
@TRiG Oh. I think that part is important, though. Without secular humanism, atheism seems to be incomplete.
Your type of atheism.
I would love to see a conversation between two atheists - one a secular humanist and the other a Confucian follower.
And they talk about sexual ethics - ha!
 
@Anonymous Could be interesting, aye.
 
9:45 PM
Secular humanism, rationalism, and naturalism seem to be completely incompatible with Christianity. Confucianism is quite compatible with whatever religion, as Confucius himself did practice Chinese folk religion.
Filial piety fits somewhat well with the biblical commandment of honoring your mother and father.
 
@Anonymous And yes, atheism is incomplete. Atheism does not provide you with a moral code. This is not a problem. Atheism doesn't provide you with a bank balance either. It's not supposed to. You must look elsewhere for your moral code. And secular humanism seems to work fairly well, on the whole.
@Anonymous I must admit I'm not as familiar with Confucianism as I might be. I vaguely recall an Area 51 proposal which included Confucianism. I must look it up.
 
Area 51 proposal?
 
@Anonymous Suggested SE site.
 
Personally, I admit that I feel more comfortable with Confucian philosophy than secular humanism. I like the collectivist nature of it.
 
@Anonymous Collectivism (in some forms) appeals to me too, I must say. Perhaps I should learn more about Confucius.
 
9:54 PM
Wikipedia reports that Confucius had a lot of disciples/students -- more so than Jesus!
Of course, quantity isn't everything.
 
10:09 PM
@waxeagle Not actually wanting to get into this conversation right now, but Exodus talks about the grey issues and does Exodus' new message actually have an audience?
-5
Q: Orthodox of anti-Orthoprax?

caseyr547 1Co 13:4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Orthopraxy is the application of orthodox beliefs rituals, customs, approved practices are all orthopraxic. 1Co 13:4-7 are the orthodox verse which describe the orthopraxic com...

@All. I think there's actually an interesting and useful question in here, but I'm too tired to unearth it now. (I've spent the entire day on trains and boats, and am sorely in need of a shower and a sleep.)
 
@TRiG will read later cuz yeah I've got a baby in one arm and am about to go put pasta in hot water
 
@waxeagle Enjoy. I'm just home from holidays and am housesitting (and cat-minding) for my parents. First thing to do when I got in was to light the fire. I think there's now enough hot water for a shower.
 
 
1 hour later…
11:33 PM
Cat-minding is babysitting cats.
 
@Anonymous 'Tis aye. Feedin' 'em, anyway.
 
01:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (668 days earlier)      last day (3968 days later) »