User talk:KHM03/Archive 10

This is ARCHIVE 10 for my talk page....

5 April 06 through 18 April 06.

You a ham?

Howdy KHM03... Are you an amateur radio operator (ham)? I was just noting that your user name KHM03 looks a bit like a amateur radio operator's call sign - maybe it's just my imagination, though.

--EChronicle 20:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

No, I am not a ham...sorry! KHM03 (γραφ) 20:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for making your apology more explicit on Talk:Trinity. I appreciate your stepping in to do so without being asked, and even though you didn't intend any offense. Wesley 21:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of Christianity

Hi, why do you keep on reverting my edits without giving a valid reason, please dont be a bigotted **s. Mystic 09:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I've done it twice too - see the edit summaries. Put your proposed additions onto the talk page and we can discuss where they best fit (there are loads of christianity related pages) and also how to phrase it in an encyclopedic way. Gilraen of Dorthonion AKA Sophia^TalkTCF 09:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

My talk page is my domain, and I manage it please dont mess with it..Mystic 11:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

if somebody wants to see anything its available in the history page (as you say it) Mystic 11:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

"O Apostle! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: (whether it be) among those who say "We believe" with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews,- men who will listen to any lie,- will listen even to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their (right) times and places: they say, 'If ye are given this, take it, but if not, beware!' If any one's trial is intended by God, thou hast no authority in the least for him against God. For such - it is not God's will to purify their hearts. For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a heavy punishment. (Quran, 5:41)" Mystic 11:28, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Pastor, can I ask you a personal question? Do you honestly believe what you keep on removing from "Criticism of Christianity" article is the word of god? Or do you believe it because some "scholar" agrees that it is the word of god. Mystic 11:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC) If it really is the word of god wouldn't god protect god's own words from being altered in such a manner? My other question is where is the unaltered, orginal bible? Do the christians have access to it? I also want to apologize for bieng rude on your talk page, I was bit out of mood "I am sorry". Mystic 11:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

you said: I believe that the Bible is the word of God, inspired and authoritative. I believe that Jesus alone is the Word of God. If Jesus alone is the word of god, and how come again bible is also the word of god? Are bible and Jesus the same? I am puzzled can you clarify. Mystic 11:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

You missed my previos question.. I have bolded it.. Mystic 12:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

so how could a religion be based on something that has errors in it? Mystic 12:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Is'nt Christianity a "way of life" that teaches how one should live their life, the rules and regulations, what one should abstain from what one can indulge on, things like that. Whats the guide for christians? If all Christians do not believe in the Bible Mystic 12:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

What binds the Christian to the religion or "the way of life" that you are refering to? Dont you agree (pls dont misunderstand) Christians are the ones who are closest to atheists , in behaviour, they proclaim the existence of god and continue to violate his command. I come from a country that Christians are a minority (so are muslims), so most of the things I know about christians is from Television and few of my christian friends. They freely indulge intoxicants (alcohol), even on the most important day in the christian calendar (xmas), the christians I know consume alcohol, dance and kiss women who they are not married to. This is what I have seen and experienced..As a pastor I am sure you must be totally different to what I have described. Doesn't Christianity have any control over the behaviour of it followers? Is belief in Jesus alone is enough? Whats your opinion? Mystic 13:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Just butting in on someone else's conversation here. Who says Christmas is the most important day in the calendar? AnnH ♫ 15:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Good point...that's Easter, hands down. KHM03 (talk) 15:56, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I can think of another day that I feel should be considered as more important than Christmas. I don't know how important it is to Methodists, but I think that Catholics should celebrate it more. It's consistent with our belief that human life begins at conception that we should celebrate 8 December as a Holy Day of Obligation, and not 8 Septemter (the birth of Our Lady). But we're a bit inconsistent in celebrating 25 December as a Holy Day, and not 25 March. If I were Pope, I would change the title of that feast from Annunciation to Incarnation, and I would make it a Holy Day of Obligation. Oh, if only . . . ;-) AnnH ♫ 16:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that all Christians should make a bigger deal about the Annunciation...but I still believe that Easter trumps all...it's the most important event in history, in my view. Everything hinges upon it. KHM03 (talk) 17:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I am not at all against dancing as long one is dancing with his/her own spouse (Didn't God create partners to indulge in them a little bit ;-)). All the other forms can lead to adultry as it is the case in many situations. I am completely against intoxicants as it could be the root cause of many other sins. Paul wouldn't've asked to drink alcohol, could it be grape wine (non - alcoholic), that he refered to? I personally believe, most of the things in the bible are interpreted in the most convinient way to the christians and not the actual truth. Do you disagree? Mystic 14:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Judas

Thanks - it's nice to see him possibly rehabilitated. Judas' part in the NT always bugged me as it didn't seem fair what happened to him for playing a most essential role - almost like he drew the really short straw! Gilraen of Dorthonion AKA Sophia^TalkTCF 16:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing that message from my talk page.. Mystic 16:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Question for KHM03

KHM03, Reviewing your contributions I note that you have rejected a number of citatations of authorities critical of Christianity on the grounds that there are better authorities, rejected a number of books on the grounds that there are better critical books, and rejected references to external websites on the grounds that there are better critical websites. As it is not very clear what criteria you are using to dismiss sources which look perfectly good to others, and as you neglected to give examples of these "better" sources, I wonder of you would be kind enough to supply a list of the critical authorities (journalists, historians, ex-theologians, etc), critical books and critical websites that you would recommend. This will save many people wasting their time in future. Hope this does not sound an unreasonable request Trollwatcher 15:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I've listed some suggestions on various talk pages - by no means exhaustive lists, mind you, but some ideas. There are very few websites, in my view, that are of any scholarly worth. We may be moving into a new era in which that will change, but most sites - conservative, liberal, and everything in between - tend to be people without much academic credentials just sharing their points of view. Now, that's all well and good, but that doesn't make the sites authoritative or notable in any way, particularly for serious research.

Regarding other suggestions, it really just depends on the specific field. In the area of serious "Jesus research", for example, I would consider the Jesus Seminar (Borg, Crossan, et al), NT Wright, Schweitzer (quite dated but also quite notable), and EP Sanders to all be serious names. These are folks who publish in peer reviewed academic journals, have published works taken seriously by the academy, etc. They generally all come down with differing perspectives, obviously, but all are serious scholars (I'm making an assumption about the Seminar, of course, not knowing all members...but certainly the "main" folks are noteworthy). Does this help answer your query? KHM03 (talk) 20:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

KHM03, This seems a very fair response. Many thanks. One thought that arises is that it might be a good to compile a list of authorities that we can all accept as authoritative so that will save a lot of the arguments that keep arising whenever anyone cites a sourse that others don't happen to like. What do you think ?

A second thought. I'm not convinced that external web-sites need to be either academic or NPOV. Just to take one example, suppose a website gives a good summary of let's say Arianism from an Arian POV - why would anyone want to exclude that rather than (perhaps) flag it as POV. (From memory there's link on the Christianity page to a Rosicrucian site that fits this model exactly). Another example might be criticisms of Christianity. If a web-site criticises Christianity then why would you need any sort of academic endorsement. The fact that the criticisms are being made is enough - they exists whether we, or academics, agree with them or not. Why not acknowledge that these criticisms exist, and again, flag as POV if anyone wants to? Trollwatcher 12:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response on my talk page - I put my reply to it there as well to keep the conversation together. Trollwatcher 17:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...

Noticed that you're a PTS grad, but that you're ordained as an elder in a, ahem, "mainline denomination." If you don't mind my asking in a public forum, is your primary work as a clergyperson? Just curious. Tijuana Brass 04:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for indulging me. I'm just wrapping up a stint as a director of youth ministry at a UMC church myself. Cheers. Tijuana Brass 16:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Calvin POV edits

If you have a chance, could you weigh in on Talk:John_Calvin#POV_Edits? Thanks! --Flex 19:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the "birthday" wishes

Hi, thanks for the wiki-birthday wishes. I thought at first that nobody had noticed! Wishing you a happy Easter as well. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 01:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Re:

Hello,

I am currently busy but will get back to you soon. Meanwhile, you can remove the tag if you want. I don't care. --Aminz 03:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

New User

hello,

I noticed that you removed some of my contributions and labeled them as spam. While they are external links - I considered them relevant to the page. Although I am a new user - my intention is not to spam the site. Could you provide me some direction as how to start making contributions that you feel are valuable? Thank you...Sweepthelegnate 21:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Happy Easter

Hi KHM03. It's nearly midnight in Ireland, and I don't intend to look at Wikipedia on Good Friday. Also, if I have enough self-discipline, I'm going to abstain on Holy Saturday as well. So just taking this opportunity to wish you a very happy Easter and to thank you for all the good work you do here, and for remaining calm and civil. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 22:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your article on Arminianism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminianism

My name is Ric Walston. I am the president of Columbia Evangelical Seminary (see http://www.ColumbiaSeminary.edu/aboutus/president/index.html). I found your article to be very helpful in clearly and accurately explaning Arminianism. I will be using it to help others get a clear picture of Arminianism.

Good job.

If you'd like to drop me a note, email me at ces@tx3.net.

Blessings, Ric Walston, Ph.D.