Mark Lowry Recovering Fundamentalist - Interesting

[doug yowell]

Honest answers can be given to honest questions. Disingenuous questions are usually best ignored. There is a problem with answering questions from someone that already has all the answers (or at least thinks they do...). Such questions seldom are asked in search of an answer.

Wow. So the person who knows (or at least who thinks he knows) that the other person's questions are disingenuous is justified in knowingly ignoring that person's disingenuous questions because all the answers that the one who has the answers to those disingenuously asked questions would honestly give to honestly asked questions cannot effectively answer questions that are not asked honestly in the perception of the one with the answers to all those questions?

[Neil D]

Doug, I dare you to repeat that from memory....again..

[ClubV12]

Been hanging out in Theology town hall lately?

Some guys in there make asking questions and never expecting or accepting an answer an art form!

[doug yowell]

My impression of the gospels is that the scribes and pharisees regarded Jesus' answers to their "questions" as being less than straightforward. He often did not give them a direct answer.

Yet Jesus never chose to ignore ANY question, honest or disingenuous. Knowing the source of every question He was asked, He still answered every one of them either directly or indirectly. The recorded response of His enemies was a variation of anger and wonder because they knew EXACTLY what He was talking about.No ambiguity,they just didn't like His answers). The second part of your statement directly contradicts any Christlike justification for your original statement on why disingenuous questions can be ignored.I find that disturbing.

[doug yowell]

Doug, I dare you to repeat that from memory....again..

Repeat what?

[Tom Wetmore]

Yet Jesus never chose to ignore ANY question, honest or disingenuous. Knowing the source of every question He was asked, He still answered every one of them either directly or indirectly. The recorded response of His enemies was a variation of anger and wonder because they knew EXACTLY what He was talking about.No ambiguity,they just didn't like His answers). The second part of your statement directly contradicts any Christlike justification for your original statement on why disingenuous questions can be ignored.I find that disturbing.

Read the account of Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin.

Read Mark 11:27-33.

[CoAspen]

Mark 11:27: And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders;

Mark 11:28: and they said unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? or who gave thee this authority to do these things?

Mark 11:29: And Jesus said unto them, I will ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.

Mark 11:30: The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or from men? answer me.

Mark 11:31: And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; He will say, Why then did ye not believe him?

Mark 11:32: But should we say, From men—they feared the people: for all verily held John to be a prophet.

Mark 11:33: And they answered Jesus and say, We know not. And Jesus saith unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

[ClubV12]

I bet He didn't answer, or ask, a lot of questions in the temple when He was "cleaning house" either. But they got the message all right.

[Tom Wetmore]

Bob, you are not making any sense. You are just rambling now...

It is as if you have not read or understood anything I have posted.

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: hamilton-beach

Doug, I dare you to repeat that from memory....again..

Repeat what?

I KNEW that would short circut the brain...Listen carefully, Doug....You need to get a jucier...and juice up 2 celery sticks, 3 carrots, a 1 inch piece of ginger root, 3 small beets [or one large one] a hand full of spinach, 2 apples and 1/4 pineapple...I guarentee you that will restore your brain activity to normal levels...

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Yet Jesus never chose to ignore ANY question, honest or disingenuous. Knowing the source of every question He was asked, He still answered every one of them either directly or indirectly. The recorded response of His enemies was a variation of anger and wonder because they knew EXACTLY what He was talking about.No ambiguity,they just didn't like His answers). The second part of your statement directly contradicts any Christlike justification for your original statement on why disingenuous questions can be ignored.I find that disturbing.

Read the account of Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin.

Read Mark 11:27-33.

That's it? Two bad examples out of a whole lifetime? 1) Jesus illegal trial example was hardly a model of the Divine cold shoulder for answering questions about His beliefs and teachings. Perhaps you who need to reread the story. When Jesus was asked a specific question about Who He claimed to be he did not respond by saying, "We've been over this before", or, "You guys are hopeless, I don't have to answer your questions." Even though He was illegally on trial and asked questions that He legally had no responsibility to answer when asked a question that He knew would lead to His death He gave an unremitable answer. That's a long haul from contemporary distain for those who they feel don't have all the answers in a debate on ethics and morality. 2) I'll cover Mark 11 in response to CoA's post.

[ClubV12]

Doug, ha ha, this is a no brainer, some people don't even deserve a response, let alone an answer. Sister White did that to James White as I recall on at least one occasion. James said something about Uriah Smiths work being "inspired" and asked her if that was true. Sister White told him to answer that question himself! There are many other examples of people asking Sister White questions to which she did not answer, at all, or changed the subject on the spot. Often times saying something to the affect, "Silence is eloquence".

[doug yowell]

Mark 11:27: And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders;

Mark 11:28: and they said unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? or who gave thee this authority to do these things?

Mark 11:29: And Jesus said unto them, I will ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.

Mark 11:30: The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or from men? answer me.

Mark 11:31: And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; He will say, Why then did ye not believe him?

Mark 11:32: But should we say, From men—they feared the people: for all verily held John to be a prophet.

Mark 11:33: And they answered Jesus and say, We know not. And Jesus saith unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

Those who think this an example of Jesus simply refusing to answer a disingenuous question miss the whole point of the story. Notice that Jesus gladly offered to answer the questioning of His authority IF those who asked the question would answer one of His first. And notice that Jesus question was directly related to the original question of authority.It is not coincidental that it was the disingenuous that appealed to the gray area (no easy answers on this one)in order to avoid answering Jesus' simple (hardly complex)question and revealing what they really believed and were trying to do.Since those who were asking the original question agreed to the terms of the exchange it is hardly fitting to try to turn Jesus' response into an arbitrary rejection of disingenuality.

[doug yowell]

Doug, ha ha, this is a no brainer, some people don't even deserve a response, let alone an answer. Sister White did that to James White as I recall on at least one occasion. James said something about Uriah Smiths work being "inspired" and asked her if that was true. Sister White told him to answer that question himself! There are many other examples of people asking Sister White questions to which she did not answer, at all, or changed the subject on the spot. Often times saying something to the affect, "Silence is eloquence".

Of course there are examples of circumstances in which no answer is needed, or no answer is better than the alternative (didn't your mom teach you that "if you can't say anything nice..."?)and other questions but context is everything and in this case we're addressing those who are involved in determining and clarifying Biblical truths. Do you see any difference?

[ClubV12]

Uh,,, thinking,,, no, I don't. Some of the questions I see on this forum are asking about biblical truth,,, NOT! There just poking a stick at ya. Just because it's a "religious" question doesn't give a rude question a pass.

James White was asking a religious question, was Uirah inspired? Sister White (can't ya just see it) roll's her eyes and tell's him to answer his own question.

OK,,, I made up the part about her rolling her eyes,,, maybe,,,. :)

[Twilight II]

Doug, ha ha, this is a no brainer, some people don't even deserve a response, let alone an answer. Sister White did that to James White as I recall on at least one occasion. James said something about Uriah Smiths work being "inspired" and asked her if that was true. Sister White told him to answer that question himself! There are many other examples of people asking Sister White questions to which she did not answer, at all, or changed the subject on the spot. Often times saying something to the affect, "Silence is eloquence".

That is a bit different however to some of the activity on this board.

Where insinuations are made, then when challenged to clarify the point, the poster refuses.

One of the most annoying is one poster who will just keep repeating the same answer in an effort to deliberately annoy the asker whilst claiming high Christian moral standards by refusing to answer...

If a person refuses to clarify their point or position, when asked, how can one engage in open conversation with that person?

Then to claim they are doing it from some "moral imperative", smacks of dishonesty...

[doug yowell]

Listen carefully, Doug....You need to get a jucier...and juice up 2 celery sticks, 3 carrots, a 1 inch piece of ginger root, 3 small beets [or one large one] a hand full of spinach, 2 apples and 1/4 pineapple...I guarentee you that will restore your brain activity to normal levels...

Will it restore my hair growth too?

[doug yowell]

If a person refuses to clarify their point or position, when asked, how can one engage in open conversation with that person?

Then to claim they are doing it from some "moral imperative", smacks of dishonesty...

Exacto mundo, muchacho.Adventists who use this spiritually more atune/mind reading approach demonstrate that they have much more in common with the Jehovah's Witness and the LDS than they would care to admit.

[Tom Wetmore]

That's it? Two bad examples out of a whole lifetime? 1) Jesus illegal trial example was hardly a model of the Divine cold shoulder for answering questions about His beliefs and teachings. Perhaps you who need to reread the story. When Jesus was asked a specific question about Who He claimed to be he did not respond by saying, "We've been over this before", or, "You guys are hopeless, I don't have to answer your questions." Even though He was illegally on trial and asked questions that He legally had no responsibility to answer when asked a question that He knew would lead to His death He gave an unremitable answer. That's a long haul from contemporary distain for those who they feel don't have all the answers in a debate on ethics and morality. 2) I'll cover Mark 11 in response to CoA's post.

You are grasping at straws.

All I needed was one example to refute you absolute statement that "Jesus never chose to ignore [not answer} ANY question, honest or disingenuous."

The point is that if the question is not really and honestly seeking an answer, but instead is for purpose of condemning or trapping a person, it is not really a question. Even if framed as question it is rhetorically an accusation. It is often nothing more than an underhanded means of attacking another.

As ClubV12 has already said, sometimes it is just to poke at someone. There are people that are just trying to stir things up and be divisive. I have a little poster in my office that says, "There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." It is simply best to ignore such trolls.

And increasingly the tone around here is like an inquisition, supposedly with the lofty ideal of "defending the faith." There just seems to be an increasing undercurrent of routing out the heretics and expunging all heresy from our midst.

But if you want more examples, what do you think Jesus meant when he said to turn the other cheek? Or to not cast pearls before swine? Or to not resist an evil person? Or to shake the dust off your feet if anyone does not listen to your words? Or to flee from persecution?

And I will end with Titus 3:9-11. "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned."

[Overaged]

The point is that if the question is not really and honestly seeking an answer, but instead is for purpose of condemning or trapping a person, it is not really a question. Even if framed as question it is rhetorically an accusation. It is often nothing more than an underhanded means of attacking another.

As ClubV12 has already said, sometimes it is just to poke at someone. There are people that are just trying to stir things up and be divisive. I have a little poster in my office that says, "There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." It is simply best to ignore such trolls.

[Overaged]

quote=hamilton-beach]Listen carefully, Doug....You need to get a jucier...and juice up 2 celery sticks, 3 carrots, a 1 inch piece of ginger root, 3 small beets [or one large one] a hand full of spinach, 2 apples and 1/4 pineapple...I guarentee you that will restore your brain activity to normal levels... /quote]Will it restore my hair growth too?

LOL; hey Doug, if it does LET ME KNOW RIGHT AWAY I'll be next!

[doug yowell]

You are grasping at straws.

Not really. What I'm doing is calling you out on your selective use of the Bible to justify what you apparently see as a bunch of useless questions that you don't feel the need to answer because you have concluded that the parties asking the questions are disingenuous (begs the question a little).You misused Jesus trial and Mark 11 to "prove" your case but failed to refute (in fact ignored) any of the obvious facts in the stories which contradict your own conclusion (that questions which spring from an intent to trap or condemn don't deserve any response). Your own intended Biblical examples refute your generalized application of the Biblical model of Christ. How many examples must one show of Jesus clearly understanding (and sometimes prefacing His answers with)the intent and motives of the asker and still giving a respectful and Biblical answer. Why? "I say these things that you may be saved." In fact almost every question posed to HIm by the Jewish leaders was intended to try to trip Him up. Which one did He refuse to answer? "Be always ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that lies within you,with meekness and fear."

[Overaged]

That is a bit different however to some of the activity on this board.

Where insinuations are made, then when challenged to clarify the point, the poster refuses.

One of the most annoying is one poster who will just keep repeating the same answer in an effort to deliberately annoy the asker whilst claiming high Christian moral standards by refusing to answer...

If a person refuses to clarify their point or position, when asked, how can one engage in open conversation with that person?

Then to claim they are doing it from some "moral imperative", smacks of dishonesty...

What is this topic about again?

[Overaged]

Quote from Mark Mowry (episode 158) "The only thing you can know for sure is your experience."

Wait a minute. Experience can be deceptive, can't it? Dare we determine ultimate truth by our experiences?

hmmm,

g

Actually; "experience" is not always "deceptive."

1Jn 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

1Jn 1:2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

1Jn 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

If the experience is Biblical; what's wrong with it?

[doug yowell]

Listen carefully, Doug....You need to get a jucier...and juice up 2 celery sticks, 3 carrots, a 1 inch piece of ginger root, 3 small beets [or one large one] a hand full of spinach, 2 apples and 1/4 pineapple...I guarentee you that will restore your brain activity to normal levels... Will it restore my hair growth too? LOL; hey Doug, if it does LET ME KNOW RIGHT AWAY I'll be next!

Does it seem a little suspicious to you that Hamilton-Beach is trying to get me to buy a juicer,OA?