37 "Bible Believing" Tricks Anyone Can Use to Prove God Agrees With Them

[ComerPerro]

http://www.jesus21.com/content/faith/index.php?s=bible_believing_tricks

warning: the link has a few adult themes. Its a site sorta like Landover Baptist.

Here are some of the tactics that you can use to show that God is on your side:


First, contrary to what you might think, it's not necessary to read the Bible to discuss it. In fact, reading the Bible will probably only confuse you, and you need to be absolutely 100% certain of your position, without any troubling ambiguities or contradictions causing you doubts. Remember, your degree of certainty is directly correlated to the truth value of your argument.


When framing your argument, use words that aren't actually in the Bible like "abortion," "homosexuality," and "pornography."

Demand answers to irrelevant questions, such as "Have you had an abortion?

Attack your opponent's credibility. If she has had an abortion, tell her she's not qualified to discuss the issue because she's only trying to justify herself. If she hasn't had an abortion, tell her she's not qualified to discuss the issue because she can't know what it's like to have gone through an abortion.

Tell her she's thinking with her head, and not her heart. Meaningless and irrelevant statements like this will baffle her, and she may lose her concentration while trying to get the argument back on track. More statements like this can be found on Christian bumperstickers or in the Congressional Record

If your opponent quotes the Bible tell him you're not impressed, even the devil can quote scripture.


Tell her you didn't mean to get her so angry (this works best with women), that as a Christian you love her, and will pray for her. Whatever the response, say, "Please don't get so emotional. I can see that you're clearly disturbed." Rinse. Repeat.

Accuse your opponent of "hating God," and/or "hating Christians." Ask her what happened to her in her past that made her turn against God.




Of course, there are more there, but I can only post so many here...

[xchrom]

1. i like that.

especially attacking the opponent's credibility -- that gave me a laugh.

[ComerPerro]

3. But you can't discuss this, you've never had to defend God in a discussion

LOL

How was that?

[mcscajun]

2. Reminds me of a friend of mine who once studied for the ministry...

...he recounted details of instructions on how to have those kind of discussions. It sounded more like lawyering than preaching.

Oh...should I mention he dropped out of the seminary and is now an atheist? :)

[HawkerHurricane]

4. You want to argue about the Bible?

Pick your arguement in advance. Find the appropriate catagory here
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html
Memorize the two possibilities. Ask a loaded question (example: who was Joseph's father?). If he picks (for example) Jacob (Mathew 1:16) tell him "Luke 3:23 says it was Heli." If he says Heli, argue that it was Jacob. If he makes a excuse (Heli was his Father in Law!), look skeptical and point out that's NOT what it says...

[zbdent]

6. bookmarked

Thanks, I love it!

[hfojvt]

7. too easy

It was Heli. In the Greek the word given as "father" in the NIV actually means "ancestor" and Jacob is not a "father-in-law" but his grandfather (or other ancestor) on his mother's side. Also, you are likely to be quoted Matthew 23:24 that you are straining at gnats and swallowing camels.

But why would either side want to turn a discussion or an argument into sophistry? Just to make another person feel bad and/or protect your own ego?

[HawkerHurricane]

8. But that's not what it SAYS...

Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

To tell the truth, in honest discussions of the Bible, I would not resort to such silliness... but with Paulist Literalist (aka the Conservative Christian Fundamentalist) I use the same level of honesty they do, which is to say, none. They want to make the rules on homosexuality the law of the land, while ignoring those inconvenient ones on what type of clothing to wear, when to shave your beard, and shellfish. And they depend on a literal reading of the Bible, when it's obvious that much of it is NOT literal. I don't want them to feel bad, I want them to think. And, failing that, I want the other people listening (amazing how this sort of thing always comes up when there's an audiance, it's like they're playing to the crowd) to think.

[hfojvt]

5. kinda fun, but it seems to be an ad hominem attack on Christians

It seems to be about arguing in general, so why bring the Bible or God into it? As Galatians says: "Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life."
:evilgrin: