How certain are you of your faith beliefs?

[DogmaHunter]

what criteria are you using to determine that oh let's say, The Judeo-Christian, does not exist?

I mean for all intents and purposes you want us to believe that you are certain that He does not exist.

How did you come to that conclusion?

I read the bible.
Then I looked at the real world.

I saw that it didn't match.
Hence, what is written in the book is clearly false.

Disprove the mythology = disprove the god of that mythology.
"a god" could still exist, but not the god described in that mythology - since the mythology is clearly false.

You agree with this method, because it's how you are certain that Thor doesn't exist either. Thunder is not the result of a deity banging a hammer. So the deity Thor described in Norse mythology could not possibly exist as described.

There was no adam and eve, no talking snake, no flood, no tower of babel, no exodus, no jewish slaves, no living inside a fish for a couple days, no sun "staying still" in the sky for a good day,... and it continues on and on.

No. This mythology cannot possibly be correct.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Oh I understand you better now thanks. I was referring to trust in the Jesus of the gospels which are written in the book, and not trusting in the book itself. And I may have misunderstood your other post. Im also captivated by this Jesus of the gospels.

Off topic, I find Lutheranism fascinating, but I also find charasmatic denominations fascinating. Have you ever known the two to meet?

It would be very difficult to be both Charismatic and Lutheran. In Lutheranism the locus of God's spiritual activity is found in external, objective means. For example Lutheranism speaks of faith itself as coming to us extra nos, outside ourselves. Faith is a gift which God gives, the Holy Spirit creates faith apart from us doing anything; and it comes by external means, that is the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments.

The Small Catechism puts it this way:

"I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as He calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith; in which Christian Church He forgives daily and richly all sins to me and all believers, and at the last day will raise up me and all the dead, and will give to me and to all believers in Christ everlasting life. This is most certainly true."

It is the external means of Word and Sacrament--the preaching of the Gospel, the administration of the Sacraments (Baptism and the Lord's Supper) that God does what He has promised to do.

Whereas the general locus of divine activity in most Charismatic circles tends to be internalized.

A Lutheran will point to Christ's death and resurrection, their baptism, to the preaching of the Gospel, and the Lord's supper when talking about their relationship with God, because this is how God comes down to meet man where he is. As one Lutheran woman used to say (before I became Lutheran) "God always comes down, we never go up.". God comes down to us in the Incarnation, God comes down to us in the Gospel, God comes down to us in the words of absolution, God comes down to us in Baptism, God comes down to us in the Supper. God always comes down, we never go up. And God meets us down here in the ordinary everyday things of word, water, bread, and wine.

Whereas, at least when I was Pentecostal, my relationship with God was understood as being about my feeling of God, or to perceive the presence of the Divine somehow through spiritual experiences. That I should look for spiritual manifestations and experiences of God. The locus of the relationship was inside me.

As theologies go, they are almost polar opposites.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[DogmaHunter]

It would indeed be true that my faith is in the Jesus presented to me in the Gospels, but the way I see it it's my belief in that Jesus that leads me to trusting the texts themselves.

That sounds incredibly circular, seeing as the only way to know about the story of jesus is by reading said book (or being told about it by other people who in turn know about it by reading said book).

 

[FireDragon76]

I guess I don't really doubt God exists. Sometimes I'm very frustrated with God, sometimes he seems very distant, but I don't doubt he exists. To me it would be somewhat nonsensical to just have a lot of doubt about the issue.

Sometimes, I do wonder if most Christians have particularly good ideas about God, if some other religious or philosophical belief might be better. And sometimes I find myself questioning just how "personal" God is- I find it hard to anthropomorphosize God.

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

I read the bible.
Then I looked at the real world.

I saw that it didn't match.
Hence, what is written in the book is clearly false.

How do you know there was no Adam and Eve, no flood, no tower of Babel, no Exodus etc?

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

That sounds incredibly circular, seeing as the only way to know about the story of jesus is by reading said book (or being told about it by other people who in turn know about it by reading said book).

A person can know Jesus personally without ever even having read the Bible. Knowledge of God comes solely via revelation and revelation can come in various ways.

 

[DogmaHunter]

How do you know there was no Adam and Eve, no flood, no tower of Babel, no Exodus etc?

- biology pretty much rules out that there every was a human population of just 2 individuals.

- geology rules out floods

- archeology rules out babel and exodus.


If these events would have happened, they would have left traces of evidence. Not only are these traces non-existant, in some cases we're also finding evidene that simply completely contradicts the stories.

 

[DogmaHunter]

A person can know Jesus personally without ever even having read the Bible. Knowledge of God comes solely via revelation and revelation can come in various ways.

Please give me one verifiable example of a person in the real world that came up with christianity without:
- access to a bible / christians
- being told about christianity by someone with access to a bible / christians

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

- biology pretty much rules out that there every was a human population of just 2 individuals.

How so?

- geology rules out floods

How so?

- archeology rules out babel and exodus.

How so?

If these events would have happened, they would have left traces of evidence.

Like what?

Not only are these traces non-existant, in some cases we're also finding evidene that simply completely contradicts the stories.

How so?

 

[DogmaHunter]

How so?

How so?
How so?
Like what?
How so?

All these events make testable predictions. Each test fails.

To zoom in on just one of those: the flood story.

It predicts:
- global and universal layer of flood sediments in the same geological column all over the earth
- genetic bottlenecks in all life forms which, when estimated when they took place, should match the period of the universal flood layer.

Neither the flood layer nore the bottlenecks exist.

Story is falsified.

End of story.

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

Please give me one verifiable example of a person in the real world that came up with christianity without:
- access to a bible / christians
- being told about christianity by someone with access to a bible / christians

The twelve Disciples, the very one's who were tasked with the initial spread of Christianity from Jerusalem.

They had no access to other Christians, because they were the first Christians.

They had no New Testament, or Old Testament, for the New had not even been written, and the Old was kept under lock and key by the scribes and religious elites of the day.

No one told them about "Christianity", for the term was not even applied to follows of Christ until it was used in Antioch which is not Jerusalem.

Christ revealed Himself to His disciples. It was His self-disclosure to them that was the cause of them coming to know Him.

Is this verifiable? Well if you approach the New Testament presupposing it is unreliable and unverifiable, the evidence is not going to compel you or force you to believe it.

Plain and simple.

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

To zoom in on just one of those: the flood story.

It predicts:
- global and universal layer of flood sediments in the same geological column all over the earth

Why do you think that we would find the above if the flood as described happened?

- genetic bottlenecks in all life forms which, when estimated when they took place, should match the period of the universal flood layer.

Why expect to see these?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Please give me one verifiable example of a person in the real world that came up with christianity without:
- access to a bible / christians
- being told about christianity by someone with access to a bible / christians

The twelve Disciples, the very one's who were tasked with the initial spread of Christianity from Jerusalem.

They had no access to other Christians, because they were the first Christians.

They had no New Testament, or Old Testament, for the New had not even been written, and the Old was kept under lock and key by the scribes and religious elites of the day.

No one told them about "Christianity", for the term was not even applied to follows of Christ until it was used in Antioch which is not Jerusalem.

Christ revealed Himself to His disciples. It was His self-disclosure to them that was the cause of them coming to know Him.

No comment.

Is this verifiable?

About as verifiable as Muhammed and his compagnons coming up with Islam.

Plain and simple.

I think you mean "plain and fallacious".

 

[DogmaHunter]

Why do you think that we would find the above if the flood as described happened?

Floods leave traces.

Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition

The bigger the flood, the bigger the traces. Derp.

Why expect to see these?

Genetics. Severe reduction in population sizes destroy genetic variation, which leaves a genetic bottleneck.

Off course, if you want to allow for deceiving magic (ie: god made all evidence disappear and made it look as if it never happened) or just plain deny the sciences involved, then discussion about the real world will become an exercise in futility

 

[com7fy8]

I am curious how many Christians are willing to admit; they may be wrong in what they believe and it is possible, the God they believe in does not exist.

I know I can be wrong . . . because of my own character; I can fool my own self and not even know it . . . especially in thinking I am really caring about people and doing what people need and thinking I am so great in knowing and teaching the Bible; so I need God to correct me. Only He is good enough and able to see me how I really am.

But you admit you can be wrong, then. So, how to you know you are right, that there is God?

I admit I can be wrong, and then I experience God in peace and love encouraging me. Yes, there always are people who will try to put me down with their doubting, but God doesn't.

Then why doesn't He personally share with everyone, like you are saying He does with you?

It is no thanks to me; that is all I can say. I have been no better than anyone else. I was a horrible person who did evil for the sake of it and found hurting people to be entertaining; so I did not change my self.

What made you change, then?

In my case, fear of hell That got me to stop the on-purpose evil. But still I was a misfit; I became a devout Catholic who could not relate with other people, but I was copy-catting what I was told to do to get to heaven . . . only caring about my own self.

So - - even in reforming, you still had your nature of sin, selfishness.

And still I could do predator things, but not realizing they were . . . like how I could get into a relationship without feeling for a woman and then dump out when she could most be hurt and not know the diff.

But if God is loving and almighty, He would not allow all the evil.

So they say.

Well, I have noticed that there is evil. In fact, the evil I was on my way to doing now turns out to be getting done by others, including in religious groups by horrible people who even have been ordained as pastors. So, ones can't even tell those horrible people are so evil; and they never seemed to know I was so evil.

But at least what they told you was enough for you to know what you were doing was wrong.

Yes. I appreciate that. But I needed to get with God first before I could get a clue how to personally relate with people.

But if your own character can make you fool yourself into thinking you are right when you aren't, how do you know if you have really been learning how to love?

I have found things in the Bible, and people have been saying things to me; and their example has helped me; also, at times when I have been getting in a rage and raggy against people, God has exposed me to how beautiful and pure and kind and sensitive and warmly affectionate He is in love, and this has convicted me that this is not the way I am being with people I am criticizing and scheming to control.

Then why isn't God stopping all the evil, if He is so loving like you say He is?

Well . . . while we are at it . . . do you thing evolving genes have made me become first so evil and then experiencing God's love example in me correcting me?

Circumstances can cause that; and now you have what we call an "imaginary friend". There's always an explanation for things like that. Scientists just haven't found an explanation for everything, but they will.

Psychiatric people already report that medications can not cure a personality disorder. I offer this is because character is deeper than physical and so it can not be changed by physical medicines, though medications might help to restrain and manage a person, depending partly on how that person's character has him or her reacting to the effect of the medicine.

And, by the way, yes circumstances can effect people, but a person's own character has a lot to do with how the person reacts.

"Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." (Romans 12:21)

We all were born in sin which can effect how we react to things . . . either as predator sinners or victim sinners > how we take things and keep on reacting does have a lot to do with our character. With God, in His love almighty, we can have sweetly soothing immunity against sin-sick stuff.

You didn't answer my question about why God so loving has not stopped all the evil!!!!!

Who says I can answer that? I'm not God.

circular argument!!!!!

I'm not arguing, just offering my actual experience. If you want an explanation, what I understand is first that "God is love" as the Bible says in 1 John 4:8&16, and I believe this and trust this because I simply find that God in me has me understanding and trusting this. Now, why doesn't He do this with everyone? > no thanks to me, in any case > I have been worse, I would say, than plenty of people who have been pretty nice but not personally sharing with God, and they have kept on having deep trouble of the weakness of their own ego nature.

So, why me? All I can say is if I take advantage of how God is correcting me, I can do some good. So, why throw out our only real Resource?

and Reward (Genesis 15:1)

I don't have to analyze Him and judge Him; if He does me good so I can do loving good to others, why ask questions?? lolololololololol

If you win the lottery at the expense of millions of suckers who lose homes and families . . . who asks questions? The winner is great!! But when God blesses someone, people argue and fight it . . . when the person blessed is our example of how Jesus would have all of us benefitting with Him. He's not the one who is conceited; He's so superior, yet He died on the cross so any and all can be reconciled to God and "saved by His life", Paul says in Romans 5:10. So, why ask questions and bring in doubts that only get you deeper in your hole? But, unlike the lottery winner who can do legally whatever he or she pleases with the money, those who get blessed with God are expected to do loving good for any and all people, however He makes us able . . . not to only get what is good, by ourselves.

You didn't answer the question!!!!!!! Why, if God is so good and loving, doesn't He stop the evil?

First . . . it is Satan causing the evil and getting people to blame God and ask why God doesn't stop what Satan is doing. Well, Satan was in Heaven itself and he wasn't satisfied. So, like him, if you stay away from God, you also won't be satisfied . . . even if God were to stop all the evil. Satan had it all in Heaven . . . with no evil there except his own stupidity of conceit so he felt he was too good for how Heaven is so loving with worship of God and God being in full control - - which he was not getting. You're not going to get worship and the control you want - - too bad - - - no matter how you accuse God and make up your own standards dictating what has to be true about Him.

This world's mess is where Satan was thrown; he's not on the throne, for a "reason". And this world's mess is on its way to the flaming sewer which burns with fire and brimstone. Evil exists, but God has it flowing where it is going . . . away from where we will be worshiping while enjoying our Father and Jesus and loving as family with one another. There is the spirit of evil (Ephesians 2:2); Satan's kingdom is full of it . . . on its way to where it is flowing.

Evil does exist, but there is good that still can overcome evil. And good includes as good as God. With God, we overcome evil and enjoy loving, instead of being wasted and burnt out after a lot of fighting. Jesus keeps giving us "rest for your souls." (Matthew 11:28-30) Evil does not control everything; it is evil that is limited and not almighty

But if God is "almighty", like you say, He would end the evil.

That is not how I mean that God is "almighty". Reality is that He is as great as He is, and He succeeds against evil howsoever He pleases. And I think it is wise, then, to be appreciative of all He does do . . .

and how He shares with us . . .

yes God is personal with His children . . . right "in our hearts" > "Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us." (Romans 5:5) This is deeper than physical. So, intellectual stuff only about what is physical is not going to have you seeing this. But character changing to being loving is not what imagination "usually" can cause Usually imagination is connected with the character a person already has, I "think". So, if I have really gotten anywhere, and God knows this, of course the credit is only to You

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

Floods leave traces.

Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition

The bigger the flood, the bigger the traces. Derp.



Genetics. Severe reduction in population sizes destroy genetic variation, which leaves a genetic bottleneck.

Off course, if you want to allow for deceiving magic (ie: god made all evidence disappear and made it look as if it never happened) or just plain deny the sciences involved, then discussion about the real world will become an exercise in futility

I am not a Creationist so I am not committed to the view that the flood was global.

I am free to follow the evidence where it leads.

Nor am I committed to interpreting everything in Genesis literally.

 

[PsychoSarah]

A person can know Jesus personally without ever even having read the Bible. Knowledge of God comes solely via revelation and revelation can come in various ways.

I challenge you to find just 1 person who knows the general story of the bible without having ever been exposed to anything biblically related.

 

[keith99]

I am not a Creationist so I am not committed to the view that the flood was global.

I am free to follow the evidence where it leads.

Nor am I committed to interpreting everything in Genesis literally.

The flood is a great example of needing to sometimes ask a question before giving an answer.

I'd give very different answers if asked about the possibility the flood actually happened if:

1) The definition is a world wide flood that is responsible for the vast majority of geologic features observed today

2) A world wide flood

3) a local flood

For 1 there is absolutely no way.

2 is almost as doubtful, but a might be possible (more possible the longer ago and if one takes the part about covering all land in a local sense).

3 is actually fairly likely, though likely exaggerated.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I am not a Creationist so I am not committed to the view that the flood was global.

I am free to follow the evidence where it leads.

Nor am I committed to interpreting everything in Genesis literally.

Then don't defend positions you don't have

 

[keith99]

Then don't defend positions you don't have

I'm not sure he ever defended a global flood.

The majority of Christians are not committed to a world wide flood, the that is only demanded by a (I think incorrect) uber literal interpretation of Genesis. One I'm not even sure works at all in the original languages as used at the time it was written. .