[PERMANENTLY CLOSED] A problem at the bottom of reason

[HitchSlap]

You just have to have faith that your faith in it is true and that problem goes away. As long as you have faith that your faith in the faith is correct.

This makes me dizzy reading this.

 

[fatherjimparker]

Well I'm not here to spread christianity...but that's a bit besides the point...

If you'd like to talk about it...I'm certain I could come up with multiple reasons not to believe Jesus said those things...by "multiple" I mean "lots".

As for Jesus not existing...well, the group of scholars/historians who doubt (or at the very least "debate" it as you put it) is growing all the time. Unfortunately, there isn't much in the way of what historians call "evidence" of Jesus existing...and if he said/did even half of what the bible claims he did, there should be lots of evidence for it. See? I already came up with one reason not to believe Jesus said he was the truth...and I'm barely getting started.

yawn

 

[Chriliman]

I'm not losing any sleep over other people's guessing games.

So are you just going to sit back and let other people guess, or are you going to take action and contribute to solving the problem of why we even have to guess in the first place? Why do you think life is a guessing game?

 

[fatherjimparker]

At the moment of observation, reality is as you have observed it.

Objective reality doesn't mean purely unobserved reality (in some Kantian sense, perhaps). Even if an entity is a bit different when it is not observed (that is, when nothing is currently interacting with the entity), that doesn't mean that you aren't being objective when it is observed.

QM poses no real difficulties to non-contradictory, objective identification of the facts of reality. There is no logical contradiction in stating that something that isn't observed is different than when it is observed.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Flip Wilson was right; "What you see is what you get."

 

[fatherjimparker]

Personally, I don't see any problem with concluding liar or lunatic, especially in combination with misunderstood or misrepresented.

oi veh

 

[fatherjimparker]

Misquoted, mistranslated, misunderstood, made up. There are lots of other options.

Why even bother with the options?

What is your investment in options?

 

[fatherjimparker]

So, it's nothing but assertion, when one claims anything "according to Jesus."

whatever.

ask Him when you see him

 

[bhsmte]

Flip Wilson was right; "What you see is what you get."

Problem is, not everyone sees things the same way you do.

 

[HitchSlap]

whatever.

ask Him when you see him

Only if facts mean something.

I'd ask him, but it's highly likely Jesus ever existed.

 

[ScottA]

Uh, what?

The naysayers said the same things you all who cannot imagine anything more than your own limited reality, are saying now.

Theology isn't a place, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

That is the point...it IS a place, a place you do not know of and therefore deny it even exists.

Was America supposed to be supernatural and invisible to all of our senses? I'm not seeing what this has to do with the discussion.

No...but it does make an good example of what you have been denying, and it is within the context of your own reality and you still don't get it...so history repeats itself for yet another group of naysayers.

How about instead we imagine someone who uses bad analogies to try and convince others that a certain approach maybe can produce knowledge rather than just showing us the knowledge that practice has produced. At least that doesn't require too much of a stretch, given the dodging and weaving here.

If naysayers did not see a hidden world within this world (the Americas), then why should anyone believe they/you will see the same thing beyond the sphere of this world? When/if you get the simpler scenario...then maybe you might be ready for something bigger. We are still waiting for that, but obviously we are not there yet. We apparently are still at the rude stage.

All you have to do is demonstrate facts backing up the mythology and we can move it into the non-fiction category. Have at it or not, but don't blame the messenger.

History has given you the best demonstration possible within the sphere of your limited understanding, but you failed to see it. God has done this, and we continue to convey it...and that makes you the one blaming the messenger

 

[HitchSlap]

The naysayers said the same things you all who cannot imagine anything more than your own limited reality, are saying now.


That is the point...it IS a place, a place you do not know of and therefore deny it even exists.


No...but it does make an good example of what you have been denying, and it is within the context of your own reality and you still don't get it...so history repeats itself for yet another group of naysayers.


If naysayers did not see a hidden world within this world (the Americas), then why should anyone believe they/you will see the same thing beyond the sphere of this world? When/if you get the simpler scenario...then maybe you might be ready for something bigger. We are still waiting for that, but obviously we are not there yet. We apparently are still at the rude stage.



History has given you the best demonstration possible within the sphere of your limited understanding, but you failed to see it. God has done this, and we continue to convey it...and that makes you the one blaming the messenger

Hey, don't blame us if we won't accept such a fatuous message.

 

[ScottA]

Hey, don't blame us if we won't accept such a fatuous message.

Our kind didn't have "a fatuous message" when it came to discovering the new world, but we know how that went. We are hoping that history doesn't repeat itself forever, and that the day will come when naysayers will be more open minded.

 

[madera23]

What did Jesus write that didn't survive?

Jesus live words did survive, but, only in His children.
God's words are within not studied in religion.

 

[KCfromNC]

Why even bother with the options?

You're the one who brought it up - you tell us.

What is your investment in options?

What's your investment in knowing?

 

[KCfromNC]

The naysayers said the same things you all who cannot imagine anything more than your own limited reality, are saying now.

They said that claims of the supernatural are untestable and that the people who claim to have knowledge of them all contradict each other on what that knowledge is? That faith isn't a way to generate knowledge? Seems a strange thing to say about the discovery of a new continent, but I'm sure you're just about to post evidence that you're not just making all of this up.

That is the point...it IS a place, a place you do not know of and therefore deny it even exists.

Theology is most certainly not a continent on the map, so I have no idea what you're trying to show here. Are you saying we have to redefine basic terms and throw out stuff we know to be true for your ideas to makes sense?

No...but it does make an good example of what you have been denying

No it doesn't. But I do have a something closer. Lots of people don't believe in the existence of Atlantis, even though there's lots of stories about it. That's a lot closer to the truth claims of theology - lots of stories but no evidence. Going with an example where we've used empirical evidence to determine facts about reality isn't going to do anything to show that faith can generate knowledge.

If naysayers did not see a hidden world within this world (the Americas), then why should anyone believe they/you will see the same thing beyond the sphere of this world? When/if you get the simpler scenario...then maybe you might be ready for something bigger. We are still waiting for that, but obviously we are not there yet. We apparently are still at the rude stage.

Being condescending isn't going to make bad analogies any less bad.

History has given you the best demonstration possible within the sphere of your limited understanding, but you failed to see it. God has done this, and we continue to convey it...and that makes you the one blaming the messenger

There's no reason to think that any gods are involved.

There are lots of excuses here for failing to simply point out the obvious knowledge that theology generates. Wonder why.

 

[KCfromNC]

Our kind didn't have "a fatuous message" when it came to discovering the new world

Please demonstrate that the expedition to the new world was based solely on divine revelation and faith.

 

[ScottA]

Please demonstrate that the expedition to the new world was based solely on divine revelation and faith.

That was not my point. So, no, I will not demonstrate. But since you must surely not have understood my point, I will explain myself: It doesn't matter if it was divine revelation or whatever, the point is that it is an example of how one group of people stood on the edge of discovery and were positive, while another group were negative and critical of what proved to be true. The example was also done in the terms of the naysayers, in other words, in all natural terms. God is good.

Skeptics of the spiritual realm of God are no different than those of the new world, and now they are demanding that the realm be demonstrated in natural, worldly and scientific terms. History repeats itself. My point was...that something beyond their sphere of knowledge (a complete new world, in fact) has already been demonstrated for them in the discovery of the Americas...so no further demonstration need be given. If one cannot see things in their own terms...they never will see it, and surely not in terms outside their understanding. Naysayers failed to see things then, and they are failing to see it now. They have learn nothing from history.

 

[fatherjimparker]

You're the one who brought it up - you tell us.

What's your investment in knowing?

Ok. I'll just break off providing you straight lines so you can post what you imagine are pithy retorts.

You have a nice day there KC in NC.

 

[HitchSlap]

That was not my point. So, no, I will not demonstrate. But since you must surely not have understood my point, I will explain myself: It doesn't matter if it was divine revelation or whatever, the point is that it is an example of how one group of people stood on the edge of discovery and were positive, while another group were negative and critical of what proved to be true. The example was also done in the terms of the naysayers, in other words, in all natural terms. God is good.

Skeptics of the spiritual realm of God are no different than those of the new world, and now they are demanding that the realm be demonstrated in natural, worldly and scientific terms. History repeats itself. My point was...that something beyond their sphere of knowledge (a complete new world, in fact) has already been demonstrated for them in the discovery of the Americas...so no further demonstration need be given. If one cannot see things in their own terms...they never will see it, and surely not in terms outside their understanding. Naysayers failed to see things then, and they are failing to see it now. They have learn nothing from history.

Knowledge is demonstrable.

 

[Chany]

That was not my point. So, no, I will not demonstrate. But since you must surely not have understood my point, I will explain myself: It doesn't matter if it was divine revelation or whatever, the point is that it is an example of how one group of people stood on the edge of discovery and were positive, while another group were negative and critical of what proved to be true. The example was also done in the terms of the naysayers, in other words, in all natural terms. God is good.

Skeptics of the spiritual realm of God are no different than those of the new world, and now they are demanding that the realm be demonstrated in natural, worldly and scientific terms. History repeats itself. My point was...that something beyond their sphere of knowledge (a complete new world, in fact) has already been demonstrated for them in the discovery of the Americas...so no further demonstration need be given. If one cannot see things in their own terms...they never will see it, and surely not in terms outside their understanding. Naysayers failed to see things then, and they are failing to see it now. They have learn nothing from history.

History also tells us they are a lot of people who believed themselves to possess some great knowledge, but they were proven to be false. A lot of people claim things all the time, but we have no good reason to believe them. They always claim they understand things, but really do not know anything. We have been waiting for hundreds of years for the supernatural to effectively show itself. We don't even know what to look for. I'm not going to hold my breathe.