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.
Palatka44 said:Jesus is the one and only way into heaven.
Anything else is just religion, and I do not interfere with ones religion. Religion is man made ritual.
Jesus is God given life.
gehenna said:Just wondering
Since there seem to be people of all different faiths and ideas on this chat, how tolerant are we of one another? Do you find it difficult or easy to talk to others who differ in opinion from you? What do you want those of other faiths to know about you when interacting with you?
When you have a creed like that which the majority of Christians can witness too, you're just picking nits IMO.The Nicene Creed covers a lot of ground, but is certainly NOT exhaustive of what christianity is. It does not cover the method of salvation, which gets back to the point I was making.
I already admitted we cannot know a person's heart. It is you who keep saying "How do we know? How do we know? But that isn't the issue here, The issue is whether you yourself can KNOW THAT YOU KNOW. You are muddying the waters by, IMO using the divsions among Christians as an excuse. Jesus said anyone who wants to know will know, and know that they know, and experience certain manifestations which many have. It is incumbent on you to prove him and us are being disingenuous.Are Jehova's Witnesses Christian? How about Mormons? Who decides who is and who is not a "real" Christian (other than God, of course)?
You deny it each time you find another excuse not to make a sincere effort to find out for yourself. I have NEVER heard a heartfelt testimony of how someone searched for God with their whole heart and found nothing. A few insightful questions quickly expose those who pretend they have.I would never deny you your personal spiritual experience or revelation that is a profound part of what you believe.
You know, it's just amazing how you quote one Christian to disprove another's point, when you don't believe a *&%$ thing either of them says. This is a meaningless argument from authority anyway, since you have provided no rationale. You've been asked several times to make a rational argument that spiritual truth does not exist, and cannot be known, but you don't have one I guess. While you point to the subjectivity of others, you make only subjective arguments, providing subjective evidence.Many evangelical Christians are hightly skeptical of speaking in tongues. Harold Campy of Family Radio says, "The minute you try to add to the Bible, from this vision or that tongue, or whatever, and one person adds this, and another one adds that, and someone else adds something else, and then attempt to interpret the Bible in the light of all this new information, you end up with a gospel that will take you almost anywhere. This is exactly what is happening today. The false gospels are going off in all directions."
Of course HE NEVER had any real spiritual experience, nor any of the 9 specific gifts of the Holy Spirit, nor the "rivers of living water" Jesus spoke of, and therefore, he's just another believer. He doesn't know anything, and his faith is based on mere assertion. He has to knock it because he's never experienced it, and sincere folks are asking questions. I'm surprised a skeptic like yourself can't see through that.In fact, he sees tongues as satanic. He's got millions of people following his bible analysis world wide, do you can't call him "fringe." It's even debated in these forums.
No, when we have physical manifestations and testimonies like the apostles had, it's for you to decide.So you can interpret your experience however you like. Maybe is was the holy spirit, maybe it was satan, maybe it was aliens, maybe it was the power of your own mind, or any number of different reasons. But ultimately, it is for you to decide.
Not when we have it and you don't. You know it's a great marvel how skeptics demand some manifestation and proof, then declare anything which should get them looking harder into the facts to be "subjective."I agree, it's not about proof, nor is it about "rebelling" against your concept of god, any more than you are rebelling against the true god Allah. It's called differences in opinion, spiritual experience, and personal revelation.
People always find what they want to spiritually. Only someone who wanted there to be a God would find him (whether he exists or not). So naturally a person who searches for God 'with their whole heart' will find him.radorth said:You deny it each time you find another excuse not to make a sincere effort to find out for yourself. I have NEVER heard a heartfelt testimony of how someone searched for God with their whole heart and found nothing. A few insightful questions quickly expose those who pretend they have.
revolutio said:People always find what they want to spiritually. Only someone who wanted there to be a God would find him (whether he exists or not). So naturally a person who searches for God 'with their whole heart' will find him.
I personally would love to believe there is a God, it would simplify life dramatically, answer many of my questions, and finally give me a real purpose. However I am unable to see and proof of the existence of a god. Though I suppose I am not searching with my whole heart, no?
This "inability", when it comes into contact with the facts, falls easily, when accompanied by sincerity. There's evidence aplenty. History abounds with people who were worse skeptics than you, but they were sincere, who went about to debunk God, and the Bible. I point to the Bible as something that is easily testable against the facts.
The 19th century birthed archaeologists in droves who raced to the Middle East to disprove the Bible. Including one who re-traced Paul's travels in Acts, and ended up writing about his newfound belief. Simon Greanleaf, who rejected the resurrection as a fairy tale until a student challenged him to consider the evidence. Intending to disprove it with finality, the result was his testimony as to why he became a believer. The resurrection is real. Jesus lives!
Cosmologists hurry to hide their embarrassment over "the anthropic principle", where the universe is full of completely independent physical constants, such as gravity, the charges of subatomics, all that. The fossil record, DNA, look carefully at what evidence they present, and consider the things they hide. Why are scientists so desperate for any straw of evidence against divine creation that a remote country Chinese farmer can pull a fraud on their intentionally and selectively gullible psyches?
People always find what they want to spiritually.
Only someone who wanted there to be a God would find him (whether he exists or not). So naturally a person who searches for God 'with their whole heart' will find him.
That's a tough one, but I'll give it a shot.Funkmd said:TC if you dont mind me asking
just so i know where you are coming from.
What is it that you DO beleive in?
1. Sorry I didn't put in the converse. I believe the same is true for people who don't want God to exist. There is no end to evidence pointing both ways it is just a matter of which people look at. Like you said some people get exposed to what they see as irrefutable evidence and convert. This happens both ways.radorth said:You're making a bunch of implied assumptions here
1. That God does not exist, and only those who make up things in their head will find him
2. That a person searching for spiritual truth, rather than God, will not find God.
3. That only people who want there to be a God will find him.
4. That there are no objective manfestations of God which should be considered proof by any reasonable person.
Of course these are my own subjective views, what else do I have to give? Lots of weird things happen in the world, the majority of which people can not even begin to guess at the cause of. I think it is quite a leap to assume that all of those are the result of divine intervention. Who knows, maybe some of them are, I don't know.These are basically your own subjective beliefs, and are unprovable. Meanwhile old black ladies nobody's ever heard of have no such beliefs, and are free to speak in langages they never studied. Inexplicable healings take place daily. People die and see heaven or hell, and their lives are completely changed, and all you can come up with is that they must be starved for oxygen or an assertion that "they must just wanna believe."
And isn't it amazing that NOT ONE of the people who has ever experienced these things ever really stops believing God is real, even after they backslide? Not one apostate Christian ever said the resuurection never happened or jesus could not work miracles. Using your rationale, all the apostates and backsliders in the world would stop believing just because they don't want to any more.
Rad
1. Sorry I didn't put in the converse. I believe the same is true for people who don't want God to exist. There is no end to evidence pointing both ways it is just a matter of which people look at. Like you said some people get exposed to what they see as irrefutable evidence and convert. This happens both ways.
2. Usually in my experience people go looking for spiritual truth already with a slant to their views. Few people have a clear enough mind to go looking for 'spiritual truth' without already having some idea as to what it is.
3. In my opinion that is basically true, whether they consciously want to find God or whether they are just particularly amiable to the concept. Someone who is adamant about disliking the concept of God, will likely not let themselves see the evidence towards him/her/it.
4. Sure certain manifestations can be used as evidence towards God. However there is no end to the number of things we don't know so no one thing can really be said to be irrefutable evidence. In either way for that matter. However usually these evidence for or against God seem to only be seen by people who already believe that way so everything is tainted by the opinions you already have. Though I concede that many people have seen an event they couldn't explain through their current beliefs and converted to another belief system.
Of course these are my own subjective views, what else do I have to give?
Haha, I like that. I certainly can explain their conversions: the Gospels are essentially history. Most of the physical events presented in them are backed up by numerous other sources. However the supernatural parts are not, you have to place trust in the writer that it was not fabricated. It is a matter of trust really, those historians converted because they saw no reason for someone to truthfully recount history then add their own spice to it. I don't trust them, frankly humanity doesn't have a good track recordradorth said:The point is that only people who really don't give a frig what it is ever find the truth. I think we more or less agree there, but you cannot explain the conversions of Muggeridge and Lewis, or the declarations of some skeptical historians that the Gospels are essentially history. I can. And my testimony is that I didn't give a frig what the truth was, and I still don't. This is why I'm highly critical of the church, the war in Iraq, and many things conservatives believe in. To know the truth, you cannot care what it is or have any bias. To be right, you must never be concerned that you are right
Hmm testimony. Well something cannot come from nothing therefor something must have always existed. A huge plain filled with nothing or an advanced, sentient, and highly intelligent entity. Right now I am leaning towards the first, though maybe they both exist, I don't know because one of them I have never seen.Well at least you are honest. I appreciate that. But do you really think it wise to be throwing out subjective views where God is concerned? I must fault both you AND the church for doing that. It's not wise at all, and the consequences of being wrong are enormous, perhaps even worse for some "believers" who know nothing, and preach nothing.
"Well I believe this, and I believe that"
Who cares? If you actually KNOW, and know that you know, then say something. Otherwise be quiet, or present some testimony such as "I did XYZ and your God never showed up." It seems hypocritical to me that skeptics complain about subjective assertions, then make their own.
But then, we're all pretty hypocritical, aren't we?
Your fellow hypocrite,
Rad
Are you privy to the inner thoughts of every single one of those people? I didn't think so, nor do you likely personally know every one, so how can you make those statements? 'NOT ONE' is a pretty definitive statement to make about something, you better be able to back it up.
Oh I misunderstood what you were saying. But still, why would the results from early in Christianity's history hold more sway than those in modern day?radorth said:I am stating historical fact. I've studied the history of the church and the times as long as anyone here, and I never found even ONE testimony of an apostate early Christian who said the Gospel writers made up the story of Jesus, or that anyone lied about the miracles, or the resurrection, or even that the stories were redacted or the result of collusion. I would find this fact astounding even if one person was found. And believe me, the atheist researcheres have looked high and low.
Rad
Though you are now leaning towards the first, You will lean to the latter soon. Though this statement of mine will likely not convince you to lean toward God there will come a day when all that there is will not only lean but bow to Him.revolutio said:Hmm testimony. Well something cannot come from nothing therefor something must have always existed. A huge plain filled with nothing or an advanced, sentient, and highly intelligent entity. Right now I am leaning towards the first, though maybe they both exist, I don't know because one of them I have never seen..
There were only a man (Adam) and his wife (Eve) on earth at the time when they disobeyed. Their action only affected their relationship with God. But little did they know that not only their relationship with Him was severed, the relationship that God would have with their offspring might never be. Though He does care that others are affected by your actions. Here is something that was emailed to me from a friend.revolutio said:Maybe the Christian God does exist, all I know is that people don't deserve punishment for making decisions that affect no one else. Though I am probably being presumptuous to think I know something that an omniscient entity does not..
Oh but God has called to you through the life of His Son.revolutio said:Basically I know a God has never tried to communicate with me. If he has, then he obviously wasn't smart enough to figure out how thick-headed I am..
You do have a heart that is ready to believe Revolutio.revolutio said:I have resolved never to call someone hypocritical again because their are always a plethora of things I do and believe that could be turned against me as hypocritical.
I am trying to do the best I can with my life. I am kind to others and have regretted every time I have hurt someone physically or emotionally. Every lie that has slipped off my tongue I regret. I go out of my way to prevent conflict and to keep things copacetic for all.Palatka44 said:It is our thick-headedness that we must over come to see that Jesus was His Son. You do have a heart that is ready to believe Revolutio.Please do not deny the relationship that God wants to have with you.
tcampen said:Exactly! but the flatness of the Earth is a falsifiable assertion, by travelling around the world in a boat, or orbiting the planet in a spacecraft. Please tell me what method or process could be used to falsify the existence of God.
revolutio said:If that isn't enough for a good afterlife then I don't think that afterlife is worth the extra effort being taken away from doing what is important to me.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?