Mind

[AV1611VET]

Africa is a place where great souls are like born. First humans are evolved than Gandhi and Mandela born to Inspire world. Thanks Mandela you taught us to live and let live

Your sentiments to Mr. Mandela aside, Adam & Eve were created in the area that is now called China.

 

[Davian]

Your sentiments to Mr. Mandela aside, Adam & Eve were created in the area that is now called China.

Adam and Eve were made in China? Cheaper, but the QC is rarely as good.

 

[sadashivan]

Adam and Eve were made in China? Cheaper, but the QC is rarely as good.

Nevertheless, they conquered the world and created havoc of unemployment. Though is not part of our discussion on Mind

 

[Strathos]

On what do you base this assertion?

It's not an assertion. It's an assumption.

As I said, it certainly isn't, and it has all the earmarks of a hoax.

Think that if you want to

What, in your opinion, did Jeffrey Dahmer do that might preclude him from entering heaven, assuming he believes? What would make him as "wicked" as a non-beleiver?

Mark 12:31

 

[Davian]

It's not an assertion. It's an assumption.

A distinction without a difference. Assumptions and assertions on the subject of mind are of little value, and that is all you have done.

Think that if you want to

I am just saying that the absence of evidence to the contrary, you appear to be perpetuating a hoax. Are you questioning my motives?

Mark 12:31

Loving his neighbour would make him as "wicked" as a non-believer?

 

[Strathos]

A distinction without a difference. Assumptions and assertions on the subject of mind are of little value, and that is all you have done.

Not really. Asserting something is true is saying that it is absolutely true, no question. An assumption is an educated guess. From what I have read of the Bible and my personal spiritual experience, the description I gave is what I assume spirit to be. You are free to disagree.

I am just saying that the absence of evidence to the contrary, you appear to be perpetuating a hoax. Are you questioning my motives?

Honestly I don't see what your motives are here, as we obviously have completely incompatible perspectives on this issue.

Loving his neighbour would make him as "wicked" as a non-believer?

No, you have that backwards. Jesus said the two greatest commandments are to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. This correlates with what James said, that faith without works is dead. To reach Heaven you have to obey both of those commandments.

 

[Davian]

Not really. Asserting something is true is saying that it is absolutely true, no question. An assumption is an educated guess. From what I have read of the Bible and my personal spiritual experience, the description I gave is what I assume spirit to be. You are free to disagree.

I asked you to define the words you were using, not for assumptions. There is where the distinction was lost.

Honestly I don't see what your motives are here, as we obviously have completely incompatible perspectives on this issue.

Indeed. One of us is applying a bit of scepticism to the multitude of conflicting truth claims out there, and the other... I am still not sure where your credulity begins and ends. There is a Nigerian prince looking to move some large sums of money out of his country. Would you like his number?

No, you have that backwards. Jesus said the two greatest commandments are to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. This correlates with what James said, that faith without works is dead. To reach Heaven you have to obey both of those commandments.

What, in your opinion, did Jeffrey Dahmer do that might preclude him from entering heaven, assuming he believes? What would make him as "wicked" as a non-beleiver?

 

[Strathos]

I asked you to define the words you were using, not for assumptions. There is where the distinction was lost.

Then I have defined what I mean when I say spirit. It's not my fault if you fail to understand the definition.

Indeed. One of us is applying a bit of scepticism to the multitude of conflicting truth claims out there, and the other... I am still not sure where your credulity begins and ends. There is a Nigerian prince looking to move some large sums of money out of his country. Would you like his number?

Did that prince create the concept of money, all money everywhere, and control it all, as well as teach the world many great things about economics and how to handle money? Is he offering me an unlimited amount of money for no price other than believing he is the lord of all money? Has anyone ever taken up his offer but known to have failed to collect?

If he didn't, then forget it. If he did, then I would have to read and study the things he and his followers have written or said, and then decide if I should put my faith in him or not.

What, in your opinion, did Jeffrey Dahmer do that might preclude him from entering heaven, assuming he believes? What would make him as "wicked" as a non-beleiver?

Do you really need to ask?

 

[Davian]

Then I have defined what I mean when I say spirit. It's not my fault if you fail to understand the definition.

My fault then. Got it.

Did that prince create the concept of money, all money everywhere, and control it all, as well as teach the world many great things about economics and how to handle money? Is he offering me an unlimited amount of money for no price other than believing he is the lord of all money? Has anyone ever taken up his offer but known to have failed to collect?

If he didn't, then forget it. If he did, then I would have to read and study the things he and his followers have written or said, and then decide if I should put my faith in him or not.

Whoa, where did that sudden burst of scepticism come from? Better keep it away from your religion!

Do you really need to ask?

I have had other Christians on this board tell me, in their opinion, that he had done nothing to keep himself out of heaven. His non-believing victims were clearly out of luck on that subject. Why the run-around from you?

What, in your opinion, did Jeffrey Dahmer do that might preclude him from entering heaven, assuming he believes? What would make him as "wicked" as a non-beleiver?

 

[Strathos]

Whoa, where did that sudden burst of scepticism come from? Better keep it away from your religion!

You clearly don't understand faith.

I have had other Christians on this board tell me, in their opinion, that he had done nothing to keep himself out of heaven. His non-believing victims were clearly out of luck on that subject. Why the run-around from you?

Well then I disagree with them.

What, in your opinion, did Jeffrey Dahmer do that might preclude him from entering heaven, assuming he believes? What would make him as "wicked" as a non-beleiver?

He obviously did the very opposite of loving his neighbors as himself.

 

[Davian]

You clearly don't understand faith.

To paraphrase from my post here, "Religious faith is a state of the mind in which the critical faculty (CF) of the human mind is bypassed, and selective thinking established"". How's that?

Well then I disagree with them.



He obviously did the very opposite of loving his neighbors as himself.

That other Christians disagree with you would tell me it is not obvious. It is my understanding that the underlying theme of Christianity is that anything goes as long as you believe. Individual Christians, such as yourself, then add on bits as they see fit.

 

[Strathos]

To paraphrase from my post here, "Religious faith is a state of the mind in which the critical faculty (CF) of the human mind is bypassed, and selective thinking established"". How's that?

Like I said, you don't understand.

That other Christians disagree with you would tell me it is not obvious. It is my understanding that the underlying theme of Christianity is that anything goes as long as you believe. Individual Christians, such as yourself, then add on bits as they see fit.

Salvation via faith alone compared to salvation via faith and works is a theological controversy, but I support the latter and I believe the Bible reinforces that.

 

[Davian]

Like I said, you don't understand.

Cop out. You are not even trying.

Salvation via faith alone compared to salvation via faith and works is a theological controversy, but I support the latter and I believe the Bible reinforces that.

As I said, you add the bits as you see fit. Such is the nature of "theology".

 

[Strathos]

Cop out. You are not even trying.

I've tried my best, it's obvious that you are simply not able to understand. No shame in that. Not everyone can.

As I said, you add the bits as you see fit. Such is the nature of "theology".

Well I quoted verses to back it up. Of course everyone has their own interpretation, the Bible is incredibly complex.

 

[Davian]

I've tried my best, it's obvious that you are simply not able to understand. No shame in that. Not everyone can.

But I do understand it. Religious faith is a state of the mind in which the critical faculty (CF) of the human mind is bypassed, and selective thinking established. Given your position, I understand that you must disagree.

Well I quoted verses to back it up. Of course everyone has their own interpretation, the Bible is incredibly complex.

No, it isn't, but that is something that you must perpetuate as part of your belief system.

 

[Strathos]

But I do understand it. Religious faith is a state of the mind in which the critical faculty (CF) of the human mind is bypassed, and selective thinking established. Given your position, I understand that you must disagree.

No, I don't think you do. You may believe you do, but you are definitely not demonstrating that you actually do.

No, it isn't, but that is something that you must perpetuate as part of your belief system.

Of course it is. Jesus Himself said it was hard to understand and properly interpret scripture.

 

[Davian]

No, I don't think you do. You may believe you do, but you are definitely not demonstrating that you actually do.

I did demonstrate it. I knew which questions to ask for which you could only provide assumptions.

I am not saying that I understand how it feels to you, but from an objective standpoint, what I have said (religious faith is a state of the mind in which the critical faculty (CF) of the human mind is bypassed, and selective thinking established) has explanatory power. It explains why you can only provide assumptions where you need definitions, something testable. It has parsimony - religious faith can exist in the absence of actual deities, particularly with religions that come with built-in excuses for why there is no objective evidence for its deity(s).

Of course it is. Jesus Himself said it was hard to understand and properly interpret scripture.

Case in point. " Jesus Himself said..."? He did? Or were the writers of the bible already perpetuating this "complexity"?

 

[TheBear]

Of course it is. Jesus Himself said it was hard to understand and properly interpret scripture.

I find it odd that an all powerful entity wouldn't make all people literate, and so the text could be fully understood and correctly interpreted by all, from the time they were first written. Wouldn't that be nice?



Also, think about the potential for abuse by the few who were literate back in the day. They could add to what the text says, subtract from it, and generally make up anything they want, and none of the masses would be the wiser.

 

[bhsmte]

I find it odd that an all powerful entity wouldn't make all people literate, and so the text could be fully understood and correctly interpreted by all, from the time they were first written. Wouldn't that be nice?



Also, think about the potential for abuse by the few who were literate back in the day. They could add to what the text says, subtract from it, and generally make up anything they want, and none of the masses would be the wiser.

I think your on to something!

 

[Michael]

But I do understand it. Religious faith is a state of the mind in which the critical faculty (CF) of the human mind is bypassed, and selective thinking established. Given your position, I understand that you must disagree.

What a crock. The same can be said of scientific forms of faith which often fall into the same category. That doesn't mean that *no* forms of religion and *no* forms of science are valid. You *assumed* that all forms of religion require such behavior, which makes it that statement your 'personal statement of faith".