Disobedience has consequences.

[LostMarbels]

Of course you could.... if your misguided or uneducated on the subject. You could be lead to believe it and hold fast to it unwilling to look into the evil nasty 2 you heard about.

No matter how you slice it. Until your willing to find out if your belief is correct you will never know if your correct.

 

[Catherineanne]

LostMarbels So you think that if I wanted to I could just believe that 1+1 = 3?

Of course not. You are correct in saying that belief is not a choice. Interpretation may be, but belief itself isn't.

 

[Skavau]

Of course you could.... if your misguided or uneducated on the subject.

Right, so that wouldn't be a choice. That would be your poor education on the subject that convinces you to believe such a way.

You could be lead to believe it and hold fast to it unwilling to look into the evil nasty 2 you heard about.

You could argue that being willfully ignorant is a choice but not the actual belief itself.

I have just had a bowl of cereal. I cannot genuinely believe no matter how much I want to that I did not have that bowl of cereal.

 

[Catherineanne]

Of course you could.... if your misguided or uneducated on the subject. You could be lead to believe it and hold fast to it unwilling to look into the evil nasty 2 you heard about.

No matter how you slice it. Until your willing to find out if your belief is correct you will never know if your correct.

It looks as if you are factoring out the Holy Spirit.

If you take a packet of seeds and tell them they are going to turn into cornflowers it won't do the least bit of good. They have to be put into the right place, and cared for appropriately. Given the right conditions, a bit of sun and a bit of rain they will begin to grow, and one day there will indeed be cornflowers.

Simply telling the seed to have the right kind of belief won't work, even though your faith in this matter is 100% spot on.

Belief has to be nurtured and given time; it cannot be forced.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

A morally imperfect God would not be worth having. Ymmv.

Why?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

How? How do I explain that which you do not even believe in?

By presenting it in a believable way.

And refute the very notion of?

Is it easily refutable?

I find myself not being asked to explain, but to defend and/or justify Gods word.

You're not asked to explain because it has to be proven that its God's word first. Otherwise yea you're wasting your breath.

That's not my job. I am not responsible for Gods actions, nor can I judge them.

Why? Scared?

It is almost an attempt at using the physical realm to explain the metaphysical.

Shoot for the moon.

Or to use how grass grows as an explanation of why water is wet.

What?

Mans ideals, morals, and social ethics have nothing to do with God.

Were we not made in his image? Even a little?

If you really want to know, all you have to do is look.

If you want to "test" God, you have to "test" God. That's the only way.

What does this mean? What?

If you honestly want to know the truth about Jesus you have to go to him. I was a wiccan, that called out to a God I did not know. I honestly wanted to know. He answered.

I did the same (sans being Wiccan) I must say our results differed greatly.

This is like trying to prove gravity to a man that dose not believe.

How do you not believe gravity? It's the fundamental force of our existence on this rock. Gravity isn't a belief, it's a well established fact that it exists and is constantly in play and you can only understand it. You can't believe in gravity.

Do you believe in hair? Just as relevant using that logic.

All you have to do is drop the rock. Still there are some who will argue it was angular momentum that made the rock fall to the ground. If you are unwilling, then you will never find out.

Show me where you've seen this. I'm not doubting (actually I am) but I'm very skeptical of this claim. Because it sounds like this person who argues this is very dim.

No, I do not. I do not agree with you so I chose to not believe.

Hmm?

Anyone can accept a belief system without any reason at all for many reasons. This leads to many trying to equate God to the same notion.

But does this belief system fit within your parameters of what you find believable? For example 2 + 2 = 5

Can you choose to believe 2 + 2 = 5? If so why? If not, why?

 

[oi_antz]

Actually I'm not sure what I meant by bringing up Loki's Wager. I think I addressed that to the wrong guy. And are you saying that some days you actually believe genesis and some days you don't? I don't even know how to classify that.

Some times I will consider Genesis as factually true and other times mythically, because it is poosible either is true yet I don't know which definitely is. You can categorise that as not burning my bridges I suppose.

 

[Catherineanne]

Why?

That one I will leave you to work out for yourself. If anyone prefers a morally dubious god there are plenty to choose from.

 

[LostMarbels]

Right, so that wouldn't be a choice. That would be your poor education on the subject that convinces you to believe such a way.

That is truth. But once that individual is made aware of a new way it becomes that individuals choice whether told hold onto the belief blindly, or to test it. There are seekers of truth, and then there are die hard individuals that quote Kent Hovind. Some, when posed with a new possibility, research that possibility. Others chose, yes chose by inaction to remain ignorant.

You could argue that being willfully ignorant is a choice but not the actual belief itself.

You can argue anything. This however does not make a point true. The only way one could be in a belief system without choice is if that belief had never been challenged, or if the individual was completely unaware of any other reality. At the first mention of any conflicting belief system, as humans, we filter it threw our own belief. Some ask why is that belief different than my own and look into it. Some say it is ridiculous outright.

I have just had a bowl of cereal. I cannot genuinely believe no matter how much I want to that I did not have that bowl of cereal.

That is because you had a personal experience. You witnessed it first hand, and you have empirical prof of it's validity.

I have a relationship with God. I cannot genuinely believe no matter how much I want to that I have not witnessed God first hand.

 

[LostMarbels]

It looks as if you are factoring out the Holy Spirit.

If you take a packet of seeds and tell them they are going to turn into cornflowers it won't do the least bit of good. They have to be put into the right place, and cared for appropriately. Given the right conditions, a bit of sun and a bit of rain they will begin to grow, and one day there will indeed be cornflowers.

Simply telling the seed to have the right kind of belief won't work, even though your faith in this matter is 100% spot on.

Belief has to be nurtured and given time; it cannot be forced.

And the soil. You have to take the time to plow the field, nurture the soil, and make sure it is receptive to the seed being sown. If not, your seed will bare no fruit. There is work to be done before sowing, and again after.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Some times I will consider Genesis as factually true and other times mythically, because it is poosible either is true yet I don't know which definitely is. You can categorise that as not burning my bridges I suppose.

Ah now I remember why I brought up Loki's Wager (I call it Loki's Gambit sometimes because it sounds better) Which is a logical fallacy but I don't mean to say you've committed a fallacy but that's what it reminded me of at the moment I read it.

"...It was agreed that the price, should Loki lose the wager, would be his head. Loki lost the bet, and in due time the dwarves came to collect the head which had become rightfully theirs. Loki had no problem with giving up his head, but he insisted they had absolutely no right to take any part of his neck. Everyone concerned discussed the matter; certain parts were obviously head, and certain parts were obviously neck, but neither side could agree exactly where the one ended and the other began."

I said it because you had not agreed on either you can accept genesis at all as myth or not. It was the first thing that popped up in my mind. It's just a random non-sequitor.

 

[LostMarbels]

GrimKingGrim

Do you have a question? Or do you just wish to berate me?

 

[Catherineanne]

And the soil. You have to take the time to plow the field, nurture the soil, and make sure it is receptive to the seed being sown. If not, your seed will bare no fruit. There is work to be done before sowing, and again after.

= put into the right place.

I think you will find that most of the work is stepping back and leaving well alone.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

GrimKingGrim

Do you have a question? Or do you just wish to berate me?

Do you need berating?

My question has been asked.

In response to your quote:

Anyone can accept a belief system without any reason at all for many reasons. This leads to many trying to equate God to the same notion.

I asked

But does this belief system fit within your parameters of what you find believable? For example 2 + 2 = 5

Can you choose to believe 2 + 2 = 5? If so why? If not, why?

 

[TillICollapse]

I cannot genuinely believe no matter how much I want to that I have not witnessed God first hand.

What did you witness ?

 

[LostMarbels]

Do you need berating?

I asked

But does this belief system fit within your parameters of what you find believable? For example 2 + 2 = 5

Can you choose to believe 2 + 2 = 5? If so why? If not, why?

No. Why?
Because people have been trying to figure that out for years:

Now according to Robins Lemma proof
Let x be a non-zero number, and set y=x. Thus:


x = y
x^2 = xy
x^2-y^2 = xy-y^2
(x+y)(x-y) = y(x-y)
x+y = y
2y = y
2 = 1
1 = 0

Now since 2+2 = 2+2+0 and we apply the lemma proof so that 0 = 1, 2+2+0 = 2+2+1 =5

THEREFORE
2+2 = 5

But you have to keep in mind that this violated the fundamental of mathematics when you reach (2) from (1). You can never divide anything by 0 (here 2-2 = 0). So this notion is incorrect.

I don't believe it because I see no correct solution to this problem. Again: Until your willing to find out if your belief is correct you will never know if your correct.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That one I will leave you to work out for yourself. If anyone prefers a morally dubious god there are plenty to choose from.

I didn't say morally dubious, just not morally perfect; benevolent, but not omnibenevolent.

 

[oi_antz]

Ah now I remember why I brought up Loki's Wager (I call it Loki's Gambit sometimes because it sounds better) Which is a logical fallacy but I don't mean to say you've committed a fallacy but that's what it reminded me of at the moment I read it.

"...It was agreed that the price, should Loki lose the wager, would be his head. Loki lost the bet, and in due time the dwarves came to collect the head which had become rightfully theirs. Loki had no problem with giving up his head, but he insisted they had absolutely no right to take any part of his neck. Everyone concerned discussed the matter; certain parts were obviously head, and certain parts were obviously neck, but neither side could agree exactly where the one ended and the other began."

I said it because you had not agreed on either you can accept genesis at all as myth or not. It was the first thing that popped up in my mind. It's just a random non-sequitor.

No, actually I do accept Genesis both ways, just not both can be true and I don't know which is true since I don't know where the information originated. Whereas everyone else I have ever noticed has decided one way or the other even though they actually don't know where the information came from! That bothers me, I cannot just choose to believe one instead of the other when I don't know which is true, I really am not forced to choose anyway. Have you chosen to believe one instead of the other, and how come you are comfortable to do that?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

No. Why?
Because people have been trying to figure that out for years:

[unnecessary]

But you have to keep in mind that this violated the fundamental of mathematics when you reach (2) from (1). You can never divide anything by 0 (here 2-2 = 0). So this notion is incorrect.

Seriously that wasn't a trick question, it was basic arithmetic.

So you see, your claim that you can turn your belief on and off like a switch is faulty if it cannot operate on a basic level like say 2 + 2 = 5. If it cannot operate on fundamental matters of belief as corresponding to understanding then it's not gonna hold up period.

You can't find 2 + 2 = 5 to be believable because basic arithmetic and just counting will tell you 1, 2, 3, 4; 2 + 2 = 2 to 3 to 4. You understand that so you cannot believe 2 + 2 = 5 whenever you want because you understand it will never be correct (in a basic arithmetic sense) and that's just outside your parameters of belief.

My point has been successfully proven.

Again: Until your willing to find out if your belief is correct you will never know if your correct.

I did. Guess what I found out.

 

[oi_antz]

Seriously that wasn't a trick question, it was basic arithmetic.

So you see, your claim that you can turn your belief on and off like a switch is faulty if it cannot operate on a basic level like say 2 + 2 = 5. If it cannot operate on fundamental matters of belief as corresponding to understanding then it's not gonna hold up period.

You can't find 2 + 2 = 5 to be believable because basic arithmetic and just counting will tell you 1, 2, 3, 4; 2 + 2 = 2 to 3 to 4. You understand that so you cannot believe 2 + 2 = 5 whenever you want because you understand it will never be correct (in a basic arithmetic sense) and that's just outside your parameters of belief.

My point has been successfully proven.



I did. Guess what I found out.

What's with this 1+1=3 anyway? Is that the way you see theism vs atheism? That's wrong. It is better described as one believing it is 1+1 while the other is believing it is 2. Both choosing to describe the same thing differently.