• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

How does one come to believe something?

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
My, my, quite a test! ;-) 1) "==== RESP:" -- My name is not "RESP". 2) "Has no one addressed your oft-appearing cartoon?" -- It appears in my signature; that is a feature of this forum. 3) "It leaves out what class is being taught!" -- It would appear to be a science class. 4) "If it's about values -- as in respect for life & others, goals & aspirations, our purpose, or such, then your scientific evidence is not good." -- Why not? 5) "Oh, I forgot, we aren't allowed to teach these things in public schools! ;-( " -- Why not? 6) "And, surprise! Our society shows it! ;-( " -- Yours, perhaps. 7) "If this is about a science class, then, yes, scientific evidence is appropriate" -- up to what it knows. But, what about beyond -- like dark energy, the origin of the universal, and the mystery of metaphysics which neither scientists nor doctors (in medical issues) have explanation? -- You are proposing a god-of-the-gaps? 8) "Then, what's the problem w evolution (not entirely proven by science) "-- Science does not prove anything. 9) "that has a God" -- What do you mean by "God"? 10) 'that creates the human unique soul," -- What is a "soul"? 11) "at the appropriate time," -- When would that be? 12) "in the most advanced creature? "-- What is the most advanced creature? By what criteria? 13) At Adam & Eve time, but, also, which continues daily? -- I am not sure that it does happen, unless you can define your terms.
14) "
BTW: Adam & Eve doesn't not need to be the one man-one woman, literally, as told in Genesis." -- Really? How wrong is the Bible?

=== RESP: 1) Really?
My name is not Really.
2) You show a sense of humor.
I think, if you are not having fun here, you have come to the wrong place.
A "feature", huh! ;-)
Indeed. You can turn off signatures in the user control pages. Also, as with most static internet graphics, multiple occurrences to not "waste space" - the image is only downloaded once, and cached for repeated occurrences, based on your browser settings.
3) It appears? At least to you. Religion or ethics (the missing class) to others!
Reference was made to science and evidence, wherever that might apply.
4) So your science
Not "my" science.
also provides answers to our purpose in life?
Probably not purpose as you might have it.
Hmmm. Is psychology part of physics also?
Not directly, no.
5) It's the law (in America) -- a win for you guys.
North America or South America?
6) Oh, I forgot that you're from a different country, prob. world! ;-) An ETI?
I am from Earth. How about you?
7) Call it what you want. So, your answers to these issues are ...?
I am no proposing answers. It is your answers that are on the table at this time.
8) OK. I'll file this for later "science does not prove anything". 9) That concept that you won't allow yourself to realize.
A concept that you say you believe in but cannot explain. Are you comfortable this that?
10) Another such similar concept.
And similarly, you cannot explain it?
11) In good time -- I think before I write.
So when is this appropriate time?
You might try this?
Can you not tell?
12) Homo sapiens. By science criteria. Ask them.
What is this criteria?
13) Rather, than RESP or Davian (or quatona) your label should be "Doubting Thomas" -- no wonder you can't get beyond "seeker". You're "not sure" of anything!
Where did I say that?
I'll never be able to (even) define terms satisfactorily for you. Your wedge out of arguments.
How is that my problem?
14) An open question of "how wrong the Bible". I've already mentioned allegory & other figures of speech which you just want to read literally, as a science or history book, for argument sake.
Who made you the arbiter of what is allegory in the Bible?
I just say "grow up" -- intellectually.
No need to be insulting just because I disagree with you.
 
Upvote 0

jay17

New Member
Jun 9, 2015
4
0
Tassie, Oz
✟15,114.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Seeker
As others have said. premise #1 is unsound, thus #3 is incorrect.

I think this version is sound...
1. People only come to believe something by evaluating information.
2. People who are Christians believe that God exists.
3. Therefore, People who are Christians only came to believe that God exists by evaluating information.
Be this information, data coming in from one's 5 senses during experiences, listening to or reading other's thoughts about god, or one's own thoughts on the matter.

I think the problem with your equation is the term 'evidence'.
Although at the fundamental level, evidence is information, there is a subtle but significant difference between the two.
"Evidence is anything that you see, hear, or read that causes you to believe that something is true or has really happened."
"Information - a message received and understood."

Example: A burning bush.
Information you are receiving is, the bush is burning, there are flames but the bush is intact, it is not being destroyed by the fire.
You have acquired this knowledge by observation and comprehension of all the elements(fire, plants, atmospheric conditions, etc), but have yet to create a conclusion as to how this bush remains intact.

Evidence is you are still receiving all that information, but you choose to judge that god is keeping the bush intact. You have no proof it is god, but you conclude\lean towards it has to be god, thus you now change the term 'information' into 'evidence'...for the information is now about god.

'Evidence' is the term people use to prove something they are already convinced exists or they lean heavily towards it. It's a term used by biased individuals.
They already have in their mind god exists, so they provide evidence to others, not information.

A defense lawyer does not express that they provide information to the jury, they provide evidence.
The lawyer says, "Members of the jury, i know the accused is innocent, and i shall provide evidence to back up my claim\the truth of the matter."
The lawyer does not say, "Members of the jury, I have no idea if the accused is innocent or not, but i shall provide information and you decide if they are guilty or not."
The lawyer is biased, they already have in their mind the accused is innocent or they lean heavily towards it.

It seems to me this statement is saying...'Therefore, People who are Christians only came to believe that God exists by evaluating information that states that god exists.'

I also think there is a subtle but significant error in this...
"Evidence is anything that you see, hear, or read that causes you to believe that something is true or has really happened."

Neither 'evidence' nor 'information' has any innate power to cause anyone to believe one way or the other. The individual has the power as they contemplate the info and formulate a conclusion.

So, if two people observe existence and one chooses to believe\conclude god exists, and the other does not, that is not proof either way. It's just each individual examines the unassigned information present in existence,and each, according to their own biases that comes from their currently held knowledge, decides if something suggests god exists or not.

By contemplation - "thoughtful or long consideration or observation".

But just because a person believes something to be true, does not automatically mean it is. But if a person believes it enough, then they are fully convinced and will interface with existence from that mindset.

"We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we make our world." - Buddha

If a Christian believes bible god exists, then they will perceive they exist in a world where this god exists. They will have a world view where bible god is real...irregardless if this god actually exists or not.

This is why many religious people do not bother with empirical proof of their god, as their belief is all the proof they require. Thus god is no longer the object of their devotion...their belief is.
That's a pretty neat post, but I don't agree with it.
I never expected you to. I learnt a long time ago that most people who are encased in beliefs, who perceive they have the absolute\ultimate truth, enter into debates\arguments, not to discuss an issue on equal grounds with others, but only seek to re-enforce their own conclusions, to prove themself right and the other wrong. Discussions are used to preach at others.
 
Upvote 0

AllanV

Newbie
Feb 4, 2013
634
64
NZ
✟23,913.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
As I said, your mind could be tricked, and these experiences that you alluded to could be unreliable, or outright wrong. How do you test that your resulting beliefs comport with reality?
The contention is that the natural mind is tricked and is unreliable and it is obvious by the reality everyone is a subject to and enslaved in.
 
Upvote 0

AllanV

Newbie
Feb 4, 2013
634
64
NZ
✟23,913.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I never said that you did. I asked, how do you know that you did not simply imagined all of that?
The experience and the ongoing ones were very powerful and also too precise when aspects and evidence of what was shown were explored.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
The contention is that the natural mind is tricked and is unreliable and it is obvious by the reality everyone is a subject to and enslaved in.
Again, how do you test that your resulting beliefs comport with reality?
 
Upvote 0

Wayne R.

Active Member
Jun 5, 2015
49
7
74
✟22,714.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
The protestations of the religionists aside, it seems imaginary to everyone, just some are in denial. This "guppy" sees claims of "oceans and whales" yet these stories remains just that. Elaborate rationales are developed for why these stories cannot be verified as true. Worse, they are often inconsistent, contradictory, and and require that current, testable, verified knowledge be wrong in order for these fanciful whale stories to be true. Some tell tales of oceans being created by magic words, whales being created from the rib of another whale, great droughts where the creatures of the oceans were only saved by putting two of each, male and female, into a small pond, until the oceans returned as if they had never gone, an all-powerful all-knowing whale in the sky that sent himself as a whale to be sacrificed to himself by the other whales for reasons that elude me.

Consider this little guppy sceptical of your whale stories. :)
LOL. Great response! But it proves my point. None of this makes a bit of sense when filtered through "fish bowl" thinking. However, considering the premise that the creator of this universe is not limited by what He has created, but has complete mastery over it in every way, and chooses to prove that fact, doing the impossible is merely a means of communicating that mastery, a "signature", if you will. It's to be expected by those who perceive it.Let me prove this principle, not only to be possible, but exampled in something we are all very familiar with where science proves perception false, yet it is obviously very real.Consider a pane of glass to be reality and there are two observers (neither having seen glass before) focused on the same "reality", one directly in front of it, the other observing from the perspective of an angle. The first will only see what's on the other side of the glass, the second will see a reflection as well as what the first sees. Of course the first observer will accuse the second of being delusional and attempt to prove it through science, and can successfully do so. The facts are: all photons are identical and pass through very thick glass as easily as through very thin glass. There is no perceivable reason for reflection in either the composition of the photons or the glass, no way of detecting which photons will be reflected and no understanding of the fact that it's always the same percentage of photons (roughly 4%) that will always be reflected. Which means it is scientifically provable reflection is impossible, yet, perception of the same "reality" from altered perspective reveals a reality proven impossible through science. Any of us observing this reality will not be deterred from knowing it to be real, impossible or not. I'm sure you've seen a reflection, everyone has. Scientifically speaking, we are therefore all delusional.
 
Upvote 0

Wayne R.

Active Member
Jun 5, 2015
49
7
74
✟22,714.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
I do not have sufficiency information to have a belief either way. And, what I believe will not affect reality.
Have you heard a consensus of what astrophysicists have accepted as the origin of the universe based on the evidence they have observed? I'm obviously referring to "The Big Bang". Do you accept their conclusion?
I agree on your second point, your belief in this will certainly not change reality.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
The experience and the ongoing ones were very powerful and also too precise when aspects and evidence of what was shown were explored.
The experience of a flat Earth is very powerful and precise. When I built my house I did not have to make any accommodation to that alleged roundness, nor have I to make any acknowledgement of it in my work, outside of some far away individuals that I talk to that claim to be in a different "timingzone".
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Evidence.
Sure. Here is evidence that the Earth hangs immovable in space and the Cosmos rotates around us:

Again, how do you test that your resulting beliefs comport with reality?
 
Upvote 0

AllanV

Newbie
Feb 4, 2013
634
64
NZ
✟23,913.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The experience of a flat Earth is very powerful and precise. When I built my house I did not have to make any accommodation to that alleged roundness, nor have I to make any acknowledgement of it in my work, outside of some far away individuals that I talk to that claim to be in a different "timingzone".

When I built my house I used a plumb bob and level but have since learned there are gravitational anomalies on the planet. It looks alright but I am not certain any more if my eyes have got it right.
 
Upvote 0

AllanV

Newbie
Feb 4, 2013
634
64
NZ
✟23,913.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Sure. Here is evidence that the Earth hangs immovable in space and the Cosmos rotates around us:

Again, how do you test that your resulting beliefs comport with reality?

You are being ridiculous.
You have to be more specific, which ones? Because I only relate the ones I have evidence for and it could become a bit intense.
Is it the fact that what is seen in the universe is only a very small percentage of everything.
Is it the way people affect each other.
Is it the potential to be immortal.
Is it that there is a possibility of a technology that doesn't use combustion to move objects.

Is it something else.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
LOL. Great response! But it proves my point. None of this makes a bit of sense when filtered through "fish bowl" thinking.
Is "fish bowl thinking" a euphemism for the scientific methodology that gave us everything from vaccines to the computer that you are using to have this exchange?
However, considering the premise
You meant, presupposition...
that the creator of this universe is not limited by what He has created, but has complete mastery over it in every way, and chooses to prove that fact,
Not a "fact"
doing the impossible is merely a means of communicating that mastery, a "signature", if you will. It's to be expected by those who perceive it.
Or those that imagine it.
Let me prove this principle, not only to be possible, but exampled in something we are all very familiar with where science proves perception false, yet it is obviously very real.Consider a pane of glass to be reality and there are two observers (neither having seen glass before) focused on the same "reality", one directly in front of it, the other observing from the perspective of an angle. The first will only see what's on the other side of the glass, the second will see a reflection as well as what the first sees. Of course the first observer will accuse the second of being delusional and attempt to prove it through science, and can successfully do so. The facts are: all photons are identical and pass through very thick glass as easily as through very thin glass. There is no perceivable reason for reflection in either the composition of the photons or the glass, no way of detecting which photons will be reflected and no understanding of the fact that it's always the same percentage of photons (roughly 4%) that will always be reflected. Which means it is scientifically provable reflection is impossible, yet, perception of the same "reality" from altered perspective reveals a reality proven impossible through science. Any of us observing this reality will not be deterred from knowing it to be real, impossible or not. I'm sure you've seen a reflection, everyone has. Scientifically speaking, we are therefore all delusional.
Speak for yourself. I am not the one speaking of things that cannot be demonstrated to exist, while putting the blame for that on those that are merely sceptical.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Have you heard a consensus of what astrophysicists have accepted as the origin of the universe based on the evidence they have observed?
The origin of the universe remains speculation.
I'm obviously referring to "The Big Bang".
The big bang theory is not about origins.

"The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmologicalmodel for the universe from the earliest known periods through its subsequent large-scale evolution."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
Do you accept their conclusion?
On the big bang theory, yes.
I agree on your second point, your belief in this will certainly not change reality.
Neither will yours.
 
Upvote 0

AllanV

Newbie
Feb 4, 2013
634
64
NZ
✟23,913.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Isa 2:7 Their land also is full of silver and gold, neither is there any end of their treasures; their land is also full of horses, neither is there any end of their chariots:
Isa 2:8 Their land also is full of idols; they worship the work of their own hands, that which their own fingers have made:

Man has built himself a technology and buildings and a system of trade that loses sight of the creator of the whole universe.
 
Upvote 0

Wayne R.

Active Member
Jun 5, 2015
49
7
74
✟22,714.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
But couldn't God have foreseen all of this? Why would a timeless, all-knowing God have had to change his plan? How could he have possibly been surprised that "man couldn't sort the message out in the Old Testament?" Didn't God create man and draft the message? And how could God be surprised by anything?
He did foresee it and has never been surprised. We have to remember that although man was created without knowing evil and with free will, his becoming aware of evil, confused by it, his free will is still respected. It's only through trusting in the One who is not confused that man finds his way out of the confusion. The polar opposites of white and black pigment in the "gray paint" become clear only when seen through the eyes of the One who knows them both.
Scripture identifies God in basically three terms: Spirit, Love and "all consuming fire". So why the anger, "jealousy" and judgement of the Old Testament? Love is expressed in affection for those we have relationship with, like our children, but that same love is expressed in judgement on those who would destroy those we love. As I mentioned, the nations God judged were routinely burning their children alive, cooking them (as in Molech worship), and would certainly have killed the Hebrews. Every society has harsh judgement for people like this. They have exercised their free choice and chosen to align with the originator of the "black pigment". "Jealousy" is intolerance of that evil and it's originator. What parent would not be "jealous" of a polar opposite enemy who had deceived his children into aligning with him and his hate for the "white pigment".
As to the "all consuming fire": fire will warm you and cook your food or it can destroy. We see an example of this at work in the "Exodus". The "Fire" served His "children", yet attacked the "gods" of evil unrelentingly until each one was exposed as fraud and "consumed". All through the Old Testament the message is about the polar opposites of good and evil and intolerance for compromise. "Gray paint" was never God's plan, but it certainly became man's. A God of love cannot tolerate a god of hate, especially when His children are at stake. If Love brings life and hate brings death, what happens when people reject love and adopt hate? Death follows. How does a Father of love rescue those who, by legal right, have chosen death and there's recompense due? It's like a judge sitting in judgement of his own children in his courtroom when there's no doubt about their guilt. Pure love, without denying justice, would pronounce the guilt and judgement, then come down from the judgement seat and take the punishment justice calls for.
So why didn't man "get the message"? Many did. Those who trusted the source of simplicity of the "relationship" principle of trust, "faith", in God found a connection spirit to Spirit, and the supernatural of God became manifest to them. The prophecies, many of which are purposely hidden, become obvious. The other prophecies, especially those dictating the history of Israel and Judah before it happened, and the future unfolding, give evidence that the One revealing them is outside of our time domain and not subjected to it. What He required of man was always very simple and is expressed in ten Laws of love. We learn from the symbolic placement of these Ten Commandments INSIDE Ark of the Covenant that these become statements of fact when we walk in relationship with Love. "You will not murder", etc. BESIDE the Ark, Outside the relationship with Love, was placed the Law of Moses with it's judgements for infractions. There were no judgments written into the Ten INSIDE the Ark.
This is also the message in the New Testament, but manifested in the example of the One demonstrating Love, faith, relationship, justice, mercy, grace, non-judgement, etc., every aspect of God and every aspect of how man should and can live in relationship with Him and each other.
As I indicated in my other post, from the beginning in Genesis, God never intended for man to judge man, as Jesus makes clear, just the opposite.
I hope this helps explain how people like me interpret scripture and define Christianity. It has nothing to do with politics or subjugation. Jesus always respected man's right to free will. "I put before you life and death, choose life."
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
You are being ridiculous.
Try seeing your posts from my perspective.
You have to be more specific, which ones? Because I only relate the ones I have evidence for and it could become a bit intense.
Is it the fact that what is seen in the universe is only a very small percentage of everything.
Is it the way people affect each other.
Is it the potential to be immortal.
Is it that there is a possibility of a technology that doesn't use combustion to move objects.

Is it something else.
Post #317. How would you demonstrate that your belief as stated comports with reality?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AllanV

Newbie
Feb 4, 2013
634
64
NZ
✟23,913.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Good and evil is written into the consciousness. People often say good would not be understood without evil. Therefore evil is required for there to be balance and this is observed in human behavior even at this time.
Either inadvertently or purposely lets have a war so there can be heroes.
Say something nasty or good to a person to see how they react as a test.
It is easily observed.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Good and evil is written into the consciousness. People often say good would not be understood without evil. Therefore evil is required for there to be balance and this is observed in human behavior even at this time.
Either inadvertently or purposely lets have a war so there can be heroes.
Say something nasty or good to a person to see how they react as a test.
It is easily observed.
Is there a point to this?
 
Upvote 0

lumberjohn

Active Member
Oct 23, 2006
111
29
✟22,906.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Every society has harsh judgement for people like this. They have exercised their free choice and chosen to align with the originator of the "black pigment". "Jealousy" is intolerance of that evil and it's originator. What parent would not be "jealous" of a polar opposite enemy who had deceived his children into aligning with him and his hate for the "white pigment".

So, dark skinned people represent all that is evil, while white people represent all that is good? Sounds like Nazi ideology to me. Are you a Nazi or white supremacist? Perhaps you are referring to something referenced in this article: http://www.salon.com/2015/06/13/the...od_has_been_—_and_still_is_—_used_to_oppress/
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0