Question

[-57]

I do not believe in illogical idea. I do not care what others do.

Again, I emphasize that human will not develop a religious system based on illogical principle. All other religions, except the Christianity, are built upon reasonable bases.

Interesting thought. To that I might add...
Christianity is the only belief where God has reached down to man rather than man reaching up to God for salvation.
Christianity is the only belief that salvation is a free gift.

 

[-57]

Lots of other people tried to understand, and left because it didn't make sense to them. Are they all less intelligent? Are you better than them?

It has nothing to do with intelligence or status.....It has to do with being led by the Spirit.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Interesting thought. To that I might add...
Christianity is the only belief where God has reached down to man rather than man reaching up to God for salvation.
Christianity is the only belief that salvation is a free gift.

Which is completely irrelevant to the question of the religion being correct or not...

 

[-57]

Which is completely irrelevant to the question of the religion being correct or not...

It was posted in regards to a faith being logical or illogical. Not with being correct or incorrect.

 

[Freodin]

It has nothing to do with intelligence or status.....It has to do with being led by the Spirit.

That is a very cheap cop out. It is completely untestable, and can be applied to every position.

It was posted in regards to a faith being logical or illogical. Not with being correct or incorrect.

So... and are these claims that you made there logical or illogical?

 

[DogmaHunter]

It was posted in regards to a faith being logical or illogical. Not with being correct or incorrect.

Fine.

I feel the same way.

In fact, I think the opposite is actually more logical: that you actually have to do something in order to gain a reward, instead of believe something. And the other way round as well... that you actually have to do something bad in order to deserve and get a punishment, instead of not believe something or believe the wrong way or believe the wrong thing.

 

[bhsmte]

How could reasonable man establish an unreasonable theology? It does not make sense.

Because when believing in a certain theology becomes the priority, reasoning goes out the window.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Jesus is a man, and is also the God at the same time.
That is unreasonable. Absolutely unreasonable.

Are you questioning if Jesus is God? That is another issue.
Christians believe so. That is enough for the current issue.

As written in the bible Jesus is the son of God, not exactly equivalent to GOD but wholly of God.

If you think that God couldn't indwell in a person if he so chose then you are limiting the abilities of God. This is unreasonable to me. If God can form and set everything along its path while knowing fully all things then to me it's safe to say that it could incarnate itself wholly into man, namely Jesus of Nazareth.

Either way you look at it, it is logically feasible.

 

[popsthebuilder]

That is a very cheap cop out. It is completely untestable, and can be applied to every position.


So... and are these claims that you made there logical or illogical?

The work of the holy spirit indwelled in us through Crist is verified by our works and tested through scripture.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Fine.

I feel the same way.

In fact, I think the opposite is actually more logical: that you actually have to do something in order to gain a reward, instead of believe something. And the other way round as well... that you actually have to do something bad in order to deserve and get a punishment, instead of not believe something or believe the wrong way or believe the wrong thing.

To believe is to attain to as if truth wholly, in all that you do and feel.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Has this thread broken Godwin's law yet?

 

[-57]

That is a very cheap cop out. It is completely untestable, and can be applied to every position.


So... and are these claims that you made there logical or illogical?

I'm beginning to lose interest in this topic.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Freodin,

Uhm...no I am not the light and you are not the darkness. They are in us both.

I am not Crist. I know of it partially by the will of God. To be honest, I have much more experience with negative things.

Your are right that it is the dark or negative or absence that leads one astray. You are wrong in assuming that I state that it doesn't affect me.
I can be deceived, but by thorough honest introspection with reference to the word of God one can shine light on hidden incideous things, changing them into knowledge and new direction.

By the way you quoted some stuff out of the bible that has exactly nothing to do with the ignorant, but speaks of those who know of the will of God, yet lead others and themselves away from it intentionally, and knowingly.

As far as the bs goes; it meant bull crap. And was after reading surely 5 of your posts stating that nothing has any value at all. Sure you can speak in words and almost make it sound like there is some case for nothing, until you remember that it is void, absence, the lack there of , equivalent to zero and negative. You attempt to attribute causal values to literally nothing. Absance doesn't need a cause, nor can it cause in itself. Do you understand that? It simply cannot. You saying that things don't have to be logical to believe in is erroneous as one cannot add to what they wholly know of falsely.

 

[Freodin]

Freodin,

Uhm...no I am not the light and you are not the darkness. They are in us both.

I am not Crist. I know of it partially by the will of God. To be honest, I have much more experience with negative things.

Your are right that it is the dark or negative or absence that leads one astray. You are wrong in assuming that I state that it doesn't affect me.
I can be deceived, but by thorough honest introspection with reference to the word of God one can shine light on hidden incideous things, changing them into knowledge and new direction.

What is this "I" and "you" and "us both" that you are talking about? Who is talking here? There only are two forces, remember? That leaves no place for a third force, a "you" that can "shine light" on something or know something.

That, if you are to go through some honest introspection, was the topic of the conversation: humans are agents. Humans act, humans think, humans invent. The concept that "this certain idea that humans have didn't come from humans - they could not have thought of it" is what was debated.

By the way you quoted some stuff out of the bible that has exactly nothing to do with the ignorant, but speaks of those who know of the will of God, yet lead others and themselves away from it intentionally, and knowingly.

If this is how you read it... other Christians read it differently... and I am not the one to debate different interpretations of the Bible with you. Take that up with -57.

As far as the bs goes; it meant bull crap. And was after reading surely 5 of your posts stating that nothing has any value at all. Sure you can speak in words and almost make it sound like there is some case for nothing, until you remember that it is void, absence, the lack there of , equivalent to zero and negative. You attempt to attribute causal values to literally nothing. Absance doesn't need a cause, nor can it cause in itself. Do you understand that? It simply cannot. You saying that things don't have to be logical to believe in is erroneous as one cannot add to what they wholly know of falsely.

Like most people, you stop to soon. You do not understand. You hold to your concept of "nothing" and fail to see that it is, indeed, lacking (pun intended). You can only see "nothing" in its reflection on "something". "Void of", "absensce of", "lack of". You are only describing the "something" with that... not the "nothing".
Do you understand now why I try not to use this term? "Nothing" is not a concept that humans can deal with.

Just consider it this way, if you like: "There is no "nothing". The base of existence is primal chaos!"

So, do you feel better now?

 

[Davian]

Damn good question. Not familiar with most to be honest.

The hypothesis of quantization, evolution, the big bang, time dilation, mathematics.

You can list brief descriptions of the ones you were wondering about in layman terms and I will gladly tell you if I refute them. But I can tell you now that if it is sound, true scientific hypothesis then chances are it goes along with the work of God just right. Have you not heard that science is but a tool to describe the things made observable to us by God's will. We can perceive exactly what he shows and no more.

Peace

It would be a lot clearer if you simply provided the criteria by which you "refute" a scientific theory.

 

[juvenissun]

Just go down on the street, ask people if Jesus is 100% human and 100% God... ask them what that means and where they got the idea. I bet you won't find even a handful who can explain this "actually very logical" theology and aren't just repeating the words that they heard in church.

Literally millions of people went through hundreds of years repeating the words that others told them to repeat, without understanding, without needing to understand.
Lots of other people tried to understand, and left because it didn't make sense to them. Are they all less intelligent? Are you better than them?

I think you are confused. And this would be the end of this talk.
You are insulting millions of Christians as stupid people.
For those who left Christianity (or never be one) because of the doctrine of Trinity, they are normal people and made a humanly reasonable decision. That is what I said at the very beginning. Christianity should never be successful right from the beginning.

 

[juvenissun]

Interesting thought. To that I might add...
Christianity is the only belief where God has reached down to man rather than man reaching up to God for salvation.
Christianity is the only belief that salvation is a free gift.

Thanks. And there are more. (I listed one and it took a few pages here for Freodin to be confused about)
Christianity is so unique and so strange. It is "unbelievable". Human is not able to figure out this kind of doctrine.

 

[juvenissun]

As written in the bible Jesus is the son of God, not exactly equivalent to GOD but wholly of God.

If you think that God couldn't indwell in a person if he so chose then you are limiting the abilities of God. This is unreasonable to me. If God can form and set everything along its path while knowing fully all things then to me it's safe to say that it could incarnate itself wholly into man, namely Jesus of Nazareth.

Either way you look at it, it is logically feasible.

The Holy Spirit lives in me. It is very reasonable.
But I am not both a man and God. It is not a reasonable situation.
Christianity says: Jesus is both a man and God. Do you believe it?

Muslims, Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses represent groups of highly intelligent people. They do not believe that. So, do not be shamed to say no.

 

[juvenissun]

Because when believing in a certain theology becomes the priority, reasoning goes out the window.

Why would it become a priority in the first place?
And why not choose any of other reasonable ones? Millions of people ARE doing that right now.
Christianity should collapse long long time ago.

 

[Freodin]

I think you are confused. And this would be the end of this talk.
You are insulting millions of Christians as stupid people.
For those who left Christianity (or never be one) because of the doctrine of Trinity, they are normal people and made a humanly reasonable decision. That is what I said at the very beginning. Christianity should never be successful right from the beginning.

Thanks. And there are more. (I listed one and it took a few pages here for Freodin to be confused about)
Christianity is so unique and so strange. It is "unbelievable". Human is not able to figure out this kind of doctrine.

You are correct: only Christians could come up with this nonsense.

I only wonder - this is what I said from the beginning: "It is all the empty, inconsistent or faulty pieces of "evidence" that theists like to present that make me think: "if God really existed, would they need to use this nonsense?""

Humans are able to "figure out" - that is "invent" - all kind of nonsense. The argument that some doctrines must come from God because humans cannot figure them out is one of this kinds of nonsense.

If you think that this is "insulting"... feel free to be insulted.