Hoping2 said:

The only works written against in the bible were the works of the Law. (circumcision, feast keeping, sabbath keeping, tithing, dietary rules, etc.)
If we believe in Jesus, we will do what He says.
That would be, loving God with our whole heart, soul, mind, and strength; and loving our neighbors as ourselves.
Those addicted to sin, cannot do that.

Click to expand...

Those are things that you should do as a Christian. But you don't have to feel like you have to.

JohnClay said:

BTW I think I originally became an atheist due to logical reasoning. It was based on ideas like Answer's in Genesis's:

Click to expand...

As many who become atheists believe, though I suspect there was more going on and the academic issues were the straw that broke the camel's back.

JohnClay said:

Why Does Creation Matter?

Is creation vital to the authority of Scripture and the gospel, or are we just wasting our time and being divisive—or worse, turning people away from Christ?

answersingenesis.org

Basically about all-or-nothing thinking.

Click to expand...

Answers in Genesis is among the worst examples of theistic belief.

JohnClay said:

In particular it was about the Green River Formation and an ex-creationist showed me information about it and writings involving the issues. There were millions of varves and seemed to show a history of different lake sizes with different kinds of creatures throughout its history.
In high school I said to "God" that I wanted to know the truth, no matter how depressing it was. I guess that meant I was open to atheism at the time. Then I got very strong tingling in my body - one of the only times that has ever happened.

Click to expand...

YEC and other beliefs like that are more about a particular power dynamic than they are about honest faith. It's often a reaction to uncertainty in life, as it gives comfort to think that such simplistic beliefs are true. But the falsehood of YEC doesn't render everything about the Bible false.

Apple Sky said:

Have you ever watched a ship disappear over the horizon ? If so, take a telescope & watch it magically zoom back in to full view. I maybe wrong but I don't think the ancient Greeks had telescopes then.

Click to expand...

But as many people (including me) have said before, that just doesn't happen. If it did, ships would have communicated by morse code using flashing lights and telescopes. Also, if you could see ships beyond the horizon with a telescope, why not other countries? I could have the most powerful telescope in the world, and it wouldn't enable me to see France.

Fervent said:

Personal experience is essential to faith, but it seems to me you're overgeneralizing your experiences. But let's explore this non-obvious reveal dynamic you are talking about, how do you believe it worked on the side of your non-obvious force? How did it manipulate the world so precisely as to deliver you the message you would understand but others wouldn't?

Click to expand...

Like I said I think I'm probably in a simulation. It is a bit like how you can go from text to video in Veo 3. It could say to make all of my experiences seem like plausible naturalism then there could be a prompt to do something that seems meaningful to me even if it could just seem like coincidence to other people.

Postvieww said:

The large favorable response in NY to this communist does qualify as being “so popular “.

Click to expand...

Maybe they were just rejecting the sexual abusing nepo kid lifelong establishment dem politician alternative?

Fervent said:

Well, I don't really share your surprise. There are all manners of people who self-identify as Christians while rejecting key elements.

Generally, it's not a matter of arguments. People rarely make those kinds of transitions based on examining the arguments and weighing them against each other, arguments tend to come after the fact. More often the issues are social and cultural, where intellectual issues come into play is acting like a lawyer justifying a conclusion rather than critically evaluating the arguments from any sort of objective criteria or consistent hermeneutic.

Click to expand...

BTW I think I originally became an atheist due to logical reasoning. It was based on ideas like Answer's in Genesis's:

“Ultimately, the controversy about the age of the earth is a controversy about the authority of Scripture. If millions of years really happened, then the Bible is false and cannot speak with authority on any issue, even the Gospel.”

Click to expand...

Basically about all-or-nothing thinking. In particular it was about the Green River Formation and an ex-creationist showed me information about it and writings involving the issues. There were millions of varves and seemed to show a history of different lake sizes with different kinds of creatures throughout its history.
In high school I said to "God" that I wanted to know the truth, no matter how depressing it was. I guess that meant I was open to atheism at the time. Then I got very strong tingling in my body - one of the only times that has ever happened.

JohnClay said:

When I was in the mental ward I believed I was in a simulation. I believed that the flat earth or Mormonism could be true because they are physically possible in a simulation. But those two events - the upside-down Bible and the Connect 4 set showed me that it seems evidence of God seemed to happen in non-obvious ways - in ways that couldn't be proven to other people. That basically sums up the Futurama God quote. So the world gives the impression that it is just naturalistic. I also had experiences related to Maundy Thursday.

Click to expand...

Personal experience is essential to faith, but it seems to me you're overgeneralizing your experiences. But let's explore this non-obvious reveal dynamic you are talking about, how do you believe it worked on the side of your non-obvious force? How did it manipulate the world so precisely as to deliver you the message you would understand but others wouldn't?

Michie said:

Q: Can you explain the church’s teachings about yoga and reiki? Recently a priest gave a presentation in which he said that, to avoid the devil, Catholics should also avoid things like palm readers and ouija boards. He also mentioned yoga and reiki. I’ve practiced yoga on and off for many years and have found no religious references to it in my practices. My experience has been a western, non-religious practice for strength, deep breathing and calmness. I became familiar with reiki when I had cancer and received reiki treatments. Over recent years, medical practices and hospitals use reiki to help patients with relaxation and pain reduction.

A: First, this priest was absolutely correct in saying that Catholics should avoid things like palm readers, ouija boards or anything else related to the occult. Not only can engaging in such activities open us up to contact with evil spirits, but these activities are also a sin against the first commandment.

Continued below.

What is Church teaching on yoga and reiki?

Explores the Catholic Church’s perspective on yoga and reiki, distinguishing physical practices from spiritual risks with guidance.

www.oursundayvisitor.com

Click to expand...

What about acupressure? I think my priest said it’s ok to do.

MrMoe said:

The most obvious Kafka Trap I’ve seen on this forum.



Argumentum ad ignorantiam
(argument from ignorance).

Basically, your claim relies on the absence of evidence as evidence itself, which is not a valid form of reasoning.



I’m sure you have proof of ice preventing people from doing these things.

From the footage you posted I can see people walking in and around the park areas.



If military simply showing up in public constitutes a perpetual police state to you then America has been a police state for a long time. Well before Trump.

Would you prefer lawlessness be the norm?

Click to expand...

What’s happening here in LA is not normal. If it was lawlessness before ICE showed up then yes, I much prefer that. Things were peaceful here just a few weeks ago.

Apple Sky said:

I've yet to see water, level it's self out on a ball.

Click to expand...

Of course not, because balls (footballs, tennis balls, cricket balls, etc) are all likely to fall to the earth because of their weight, and so is any water one might try to put on them. The weight of the earth does not make it fall to the earth - that doesn't even make sense - but the water is attracted to the earth because of the weight of that water.

I didn’t know he’s Catholic. Cool!

Fervent said:

You sure seemed insistent upon it earlier. So what is this opinion built on? How do you justify it?

Click to expand...

When I was in the mental ward I believed I was in a simulation. I believed that the flat earth or Mormonism could be true because they are physically possible in a simulation. But those two events - the upside-down Bible and the Connect 4 set showed me that it seems evidence of God seemed to happen in non-obvious ways - in ways that couldn't be proven to other people. That basically sums up the Futurama God quote. So the world gives the impression that it is just naturalistic. I also had experiences related to Maundy Thursday.

Apple Sky said:

Just like the earth, bound in via Antarctica.

Job 38:10 - When I fixed its boundaries and set in place its bars and doors, and I declared: ‘You may come this far, but no farther; here your proud waves must stop’?

Click to expand...

But what in Job 38:10 shows that Antarctica is meant? Looking at that verse in context, we find that God is talking to Job about the sea generally, not specifically the sea in the Antarctic region:

“8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors, When it burst forth and issued from the womb; 9 When I made the clouds its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band; 10 When I fixed My limit for it, And set bars and doors; 11 When I said, ‘This far you may come, but no farther, And here your proud waves must stop!’” (Job 38:8-11 NKJV)

Talking about stopping, I hope that if you feel the slightest bad effects health-wise from being back here, you will take another break. It's good to have you back, but don't make yourself ill

JohnClay said:

I'm just sharing my thoughts (my surprise that they reject a key pillar of Christianity), not trying to win a perfect (fallacy-free) debate to prove that there was no resurrection.

Click to expand...

Well, I don't really share your surprise. There are all manners of people who self-identify as Christians while rejecting key elements.

JohnClay said:

Then what about why Christians can become atheists in general? Is it just because they were ignorant of the best arguments for Christianity? Then there are atheists that become Christians.

Click to expand...

Generally, it's not a matter of arguments. People rarely make those kinds of transitions based on examining the arguments and weighing them against each other, arguments tend to come after the fact. More often the issues are social and cultural, where intellectual issues come into play is acting like a lawyer justifying a conclusion rather than critically evaluating the arguments from any sort of objective criteria or consistent hermeneutic.

Fervent said:

You've presented nothing by way of argumentation, other than employing a fallacy.

Click to expand...

I'm just sharing my thoughts (my surprise that they reject a key pillar of Christianity), not trying to win a perfect (fallacy-free) debate to prove that there was no resurrection.

Fervent said:

And as I said earlier, I don't think the case for the resurrection is "watertight", simply that with what evidence is available it is the best explanation.

Click to expand...

Then what about why Christians can become atheists in general? Is it just because they were ignorant of the best arguments for Christianity? Then there are atheists that become Christians.

JohnClay said:

One possibility is an observer substance - though I don't see any evidence of related phenomena like telepathy. Also my simulation belief can be used to explain absolutely anything that is miraculous.

Click to expand...

Ok, though that's neither here nor there.

JohnClay said:

It sounds like "God of the gaps".

Click to expand...

If I were arguing "there are mysteries, therefore God" it certainly would be. But it is equally naturalism of the gaps to assume that such mysteries will give way to naturalistic explanation. In both cases, it involves making a sampling error that begs the question.

JohnClay said:

I believe that God has a sense of humour. BTW another thing that happened in my hospital stay in 2019 was this:

I realised that there were 42 holes in Connect 4 and that 42 was related to the ultimate question so I thought I'd count the pieces and there were exactly 42 but not 21 of each like there is supposed to be. There were 19 and 23 which are special numbers - prime numbers. The question that goes with "42" was said to be

Phrases from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Click to expand...

Ok

JohnClay said:

"What do you get if you multiply six by nine?"
The author was an atheist and I suspect that is partly why he didn't involve the number 7. It should be "what's 6 times 7". I think 7 is related to God and 6 is related to man. So I think it is related to life being about the interaction with God and man. And again only I felt this as an interaction with an intelligent force. Everyone else would see it as a coincidence. But like I said, Connect 4 sets always have 21 pieces of each colour. Though eventually I tracked down the set (a non-original brand) and it had 23 of each colour but then they must have lost 4 red pieces.

Click to expand...

Ok

JohnClay said:

Like I said it is just my opinion. I'm not saying I've proven it as Truth.

Click to expand...

You sure seemed insistent upon it earlier. So what is this opinion built on? How do you justify it?

Fervent said:

No, at least not exclusively perhaps. There's a plethora of phenomenon with no current explanation. I suppose the most critical would be consciousness,

Click to expand...

One possibility is an observer substance - though I don't see any evidence of related phenomena like telepathy. Also my simulation belief can be used to explain absolutely anything that is miraculous.

Fervent said:

but I wasn't specifically thinking of particulars. Both common and historical events exist that escape explanation, beyond highly speculative theories.

Click to expand...

It sounds like "God of the gaps".

Fervent said:

Yes, you've mentioned that. But an agnostic cartoon comedy writer is a questionable source for philosophic/theological truth. It is a good line, though.

Click to expand...

I believe that God has a sense of humour. BTW another thing that happened in my hospital stay in 2019 was this:

I realised that there were 42 holes in Connect 4 and that 42 was related to the ultimate question so I thought I'd count the pieces and there were exactly 42 but not 21 of each like there is supposed to be. There were 19 and 23 which are special numbers - prime numbers. The question that goes with "42" was said to be
"What do you get if you multiply six by nine?"
The author was an atheist and I suspect that is partly why he didn't involve the number 7. It should be "what's 6 times 7". I think 7 is related to God and 6 is related to man. So I think it is related to life being about the interaction with God and man. And again only I felt this as an interaction with an intelligent force. Everyone else would see it as a coincidence. But like I said, Connect 4 sets always have 21 pieces of each colour. Though eventually I tracked down the set (a non-original brand) and it had 23 of each colour but then they must have lost 4 red pieces.

Fervent said:

The "rules" of physics are hardly predictable, and it's rather presumptuous to believe that our current mechanical understanding of reality is reflective of anything more than our ability to improve our conjecture when our theories start to fail. If all you mean is that there is a generally ordered reality that allows us to reasonably make probabilistic predictions then you're not really saying much, and you're exceeding the epistemic warrant of the reasoning that produces our models of "physics" when you take them to be absolute.

Click to expand...

Like I said it is just my opinion. I'm not saying I've proven it as Truth.

Apple Sky said:

Have you ever watched a ship disappear over the horizon ? If so, take a telescope & watch it magically zoom back in to full view.

Click to expand...

This is trivially false, yet you have repeated this claim multiple times. You put yourself up for ridicule every time you say this.

JohnClay said:

I'm not saying I've disproven the physical resurrection, just that it isn't as watertight as you think it is. If MLK and the bishop think that unreasonable arguments are reasonable there must be another reason. Perhaps they believe it for fallacious reasons. But on the other hand I think a lot of religious people also believe things for fallacious reasons. What do they have to gain from disbelief in the resurrection? They would lose their salvation. Maybe they think they're smart for siding with the liberal skeptics? I think the only reason I keep bringing up MLK and the bishop is that I find it surprising. I mean they're Christians and they apparently disbelieve one of the key requirements of being a saved Christian. And the bishop told the world about it which could cause a backlash. Or maybe it made him more popular as well?

Click to expand...

You've presented nothing by way of argumentation, other than employing a fallacy. Why they believed what they believed isn't really material to our discussion, simply the manner in which you're appropriating their opinions. As for their self-identifying as Christians while denying a major tenet of Christianity, there's nothing particularly interesting about that as there are all manner of aberant beliefs out there. Whatever there reasons were, they don't speak to the issue without their arguments being presented. A lot of people believe a lot of things for fallacious reasons, but your clinging to them as an argument is a fallacious argument. Their opinion is only relevant if they had access to something beyond what is available to everybody else, and then it is only whatever it is that was available to them that is of interest. Their opinion says nothing about the strength of arguments that convinced them.

And as I said earlier, I don't think the case for the resurrection is "watertight", simply that with what evidence is available it is the best explanation. And when I say that, I mean that it is the most parsimonius so long as we don't load the deck before considering the evidence such that it is.

ozso said:

I meant explain the first part of your post.

Click to expand...

Well, the title says: "teachers can't demand students, staff use wrong pronouns:"

It took most of the article for them to explain that a teacher that identified as a different sex can't force students to refer them with a pronoun of their choice.

Fervent said:

So you've transitioned from argument to authority to argumentum ad populem. Keep going, maybe you can hit every species of ad hominem.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying I've disproven the physical resurrection, just that it isn't as watertight as you think it is. If MLK and the bishop think that unreasonable arguments are reasonable there must be another reason. Perhaps they believe it for fallacious reasons. But on the other hand I think a lot of religious people also believe things for fallacious reasons. What do they have to gain from disbelief in the resurrection? They would lose their salvation. Maybe they think they're smart for siding with the liberal skeptics? I think the only reason I keep bringing up MLK and the bishop is that I find it surprising. I mean they're Christians and they apparently disbelieve one of the key requirements of being a saved Christian. And the bishop told the world about it which could cause a backlash. Or maybe it made him more popular as well?

I know some electricians who are pretty firm believers in grounding.