SHEEPEOPLE

[bhsmte]

Then why is it that you lot are so determined to keep grounded in the known world...while we are the ones who have braved leaving that mother's skirt?

I don't see the realities (some of them harsh) about the natural world as mother's skirt. You can though if it suits you.

 

[ScottA]

I see lots of claims, but zero evidence.

No spiritual glasses.

 

[bhsmte]

No spiritual glasses.

You really mean; no psychological need, to see things the way I see them.

 

[ScottA]

Mars is another world, yet we can find objective evidence that it exists.

Why don't you show us the objective evidence that you discovered which led you to accept this other world as being real.

Mars is of the SAME universe. By "world" I meant "not of this world."

Have you not been listening? Object evidence is limited to THIS world...and would not prove anything of the other [world]. And, I did not discover anything. I cried out to a God I didn't know existed...and he answered, and gifted me with his spirit, and the ability to see what he has shown of himself all through the history (his story) of the world. Now, I (just as millions of others) are in a position to share. Whether it is received or not, is a sign of whether the person hearing it, has received the same spiritual gift. If you do not have this spiritual gift and would like it, you just need to ask the same God I didn't know but now do.

 

[Loudmouth]

No spiritual glasses.

Are those glasses invisible as well?

 

[Loudmouth]

Mars is of the SAME universe.

God is not in this universe? Not anywhere? God doesn't make any impact on this universe at all?

 

[bhsmte]

Mars is of the SAME universe. By "world" I meant "not of this world."

Have you not been listening? Object evidence is limited to THIS world...and would not prove anything of the other [world]. And, I did not discover anything. I cried out to a God I didn't know existed...and he answered, and gifted me with his spirit, and the ability to see what he has shown of himself all through the history (his story) of the world. Now, I (just as millions of others) are in a position to share. Whether it is received or not, is a sign of whether the person hearing it, has received the same spiritual gift. If you do not have this spiritual gift and would like it, you just need to ask the same God I didn't know but now do.

Some people just have a psychological need to believe in a God and the comfort this brings them in knowing someone is looking out for them and they have a chance at eternal life.

Nothing wrong with that, if it allows one to cope with life better and makes them a better person. Now, what you don't seem to understand, is not everyone has that same need as you and doesn't see things the same way as you, as this seems to baffle you.

The world over and for many decades, fewer and fewer people are believing in a religion and or God and it is likely, this trend will continue.

 

[Michael]

As part of continuing a side discussion with you related to Panenthism, have you looked at the ideas around the CosmicChrist? The ideas around the CosmicChrist works hand in hand with Panentheism. It works for me as a way to look beyond the man named Jesus, and in a way that extends through the whole of the universe. I've read a Sufi mystics who said that Christ is the Light of the Universe. That's a Panentheist perspective.

.

I can't say that I've really checked out that idea, but I'll do so this afternoon. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Davian]

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/sheepeople.7898632/page-33#post-68376968



Substantiation isn't the problem. <snip personal attack>

Then do it.

 

[Davian]

Ya, and Republicans and Democrats tend to believe opposite things about the same President too. You're burying yourself at this point because you're deliberately misusing terms, and you haven't figured out the concept of monotheism. The fact there are multiple religions does *not* mean there are multiple "gods". That's simply another example of "choices" you make in terms of your personal "beliefs" about the topic of God (singular).

Define "God".

 

[Michael]

Some people just have a psychological need to believe in a God and the comfort this brings them in knowing someone is looking out for them and they have a chance at eternal life.

And some atheists have a psychological need to believe that they are smarter and more intelligent than the vast majority of the planet and that their *lack of* experiences of God speak for the whole of humanity. They tend to be "evangelicals" too, intent on "spreading the good news" of atheism on every religious website they can find.

The world over and for many decades, fewer and fewer people are believing in a religion and or God and it is likely, this trend will continue.

Sounds like wishful thinking to me since self proclaimed atheists tend to be in the single digit minority. Even folks that drop out of religious institutions don't necessarily embrace atheism.

 

[Michael]

Then do it.

Already done. Your denial process isn't something I can control however.

 

[Michael]

Are those glasses invisible as well?

If so, they're probably made of 'dark matter'.

 

[Davian]

What "gods"? You clearly hold the belief <snip>

As you again fail to read my mind, from an earlier post:

I don't claim to know about gods. I would describe my theological position as ignostic.

"Ignosticism is the view that the question of whether or not God exists is inherently meaningless until ultimately defined. And if defined, is it falsifiable? It takes the firm stand in saying that; I refuse to take a position until ‘god’ is properly and positively defined. The reason for this ignosticism position, is because in some religious debates the topic and definition god is intentionally left vague because if you define the essence of this divine religious deity then it is possible to prove falsifiability or nonexistence. And when not empirically defined, this is were ignosticism falls back into it original state; that since God cannot be defined then we cannot even discuss the issue when the descriptive definition of a celestial being by the believer is not given."

https://bittersweetend.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/the-ignosticism-position/

 

[Michael]

You really mean; no psychological need, to see things the way I see them.

We all have a psychological need to believe that we have a handle on "reality" that is somehow 'better than' other concepts of reality. We all have a psychological need to believe we are correct too. That stuff doesn't just go away because one embraces atheism as evidenced by the large number of evangelical atheists that typically post to religious websites.

 

[Michael]

As you again fail to read my mind, from an earlier post:

I don't claim to know about gods. I would describe my theological position as ignostic.

"Ignosticism is the view that the question of whether or not God exists is inherently meaningless until ultimately defined. And if defined, is it falsifiable? It takes the firm stand in saying that; I refuse to take a position until ‘god’ is properly and positively defined. The reason for this ignosticism position, is because in some religious debates the topic and definition god is intentionally left vague because if you define the essence of this divine religious deity then it is possible to prove falsifiability or nonexistence. And when not empirically defined, this is were ignosticism falls back into it original state; that since God cannot be defined then we cannot even discuss the issue when the descriptive definition of a celestial being by the believer is not given."

https://bittersweetend.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/the-ignosticism-position/

Where does that definition use the term 'gods' plural or is that just your personal idiosyncrasy? I even defined God for you in a purely empirical manner, and you simply handwaved at that definition.

 

[Davian]

Er, no. Jesus is in fact a "good authority"

It is my understanding that we don't actually have anything written by Jesus, we only have the bible.

on the topic of God as witnessed by the fact that Christians and Muslims both revere him as a "teacher" about God (singular)

But not necessarily the same "God".

, and combined they represent more than 1/2 the planet.

I was just telling Scott about how often you use the appeal to popularity fallacy.

 

[Davian]

Then why is it that you lot are so determined to keep grounded in the known world

The lack of compelling evidence for this undefined, unfalsifiable god-thing you are talking about.

...while we

Who is this "we" that you speak for?

are the ones who have braved leaving that mother's skirt?

Brave? How is going for the "comfort blanket" option "brave"?

 

[Michael]

You really mean; no psychological need, to see things the way I see them.

False. You still have a psychological need to believe that you have "reality" figure out better than theists, and a need to 'evangelize' your cause too.

 

[dlamberth]

Define "God".

That would be like defining Love. It can't be done.

.