"Okay, I believe in a higher power(s) now...."

[MrsFoundit]

So I guess we are back to square one...? How does a deist/theist jump from merely believing in [a] god, to your specific God, the God of Christianity?

By realising that that the people who already are Christians are people who believe in the same one. Hence "We believe in ONE God". "We" is not "I", we say the Nicene Creed/CF Statement of Faith together in groups, we do not all say "I believe..." at the same time, we could, but we do not.

 

[cvanwey]

By realising that that the people who already are Christians are people who believe in the same one. Hence "We believe in ONE God". "We" is not "I", we say the Nicene Creed/CF Statement of Faith together in groups, we do not all say "I believe..." at the same time, we could, but we do not.

The number of believers does not make something true. Or does it?

So again, if we cannot establish/verify/justify/prove one of the most notable verses in the Bible, (i.e.): "And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith", then what are we really left with?

And if you can tell me what we are left with, which I'm going to preemptively assume it's 'faith', then please tell me how this identified mechanism effectively guides humans towards what is true?

 

[NBB]

I say that people when they get desperate they are more open to God because its true, but you make it seems like believing in God and becoming christian is living a false reality or having a belief in a religion but its actually meeting God in your life, one the best things that can happen to a person in this world.

 

[MrsFoundit]

How do we verify which one is false. Or maybe, they are both false?

I know which works for me, now if I believe in freedom of world view as a human right, why do we need to know which one is "false"?

So that a skeptic could believe it without needing to worry about what seems absurd to some people ?

 

[cvanwey]

I say that people when they get desperate they are more open to God because its true, but you make it seems like believing in God and becoming christian is living a false reality or having a belief in a religion but its actually meeting God in your life, one the best things that can happen to a person in this world.

I'm not trying to make it 'seem' like anything. I don't know if yours, 'theirs', or another claim, or none of them, are true? I'm simply trying to get you to tell me why (yours) is rights, and theirs is not?

Remember, 'I'm a deist/theist' now. So please address all the counter points made, in my last post to you, or admit that you have absolutely no basis, above and beyond anyone else, to safely justify your own belief.

So again, if you care to address post #60, please do

 

[cvanwey]

I know which works for me,

I chopped the rest, because I'm not going to follow the red herring.

Many Muslims will say the exact same thing as you. Why are they incorrect?

 

[MrsFoundit]

The number of believers does not make something true. Or does it?

I am answering a question about how a process happens, because that is what you asked about. If someone is already a theist, they end up from there to Christian by realising it is the God Christians also know about that they have discovered.

 

[NBB]

I'm not trying to make it 'seem' like anything. I don't know if yours, 'theirs', or another claim, or none of them, are true? I'm simply trying to get you to tell me why (yours) is rights, and theirs is not?

Remember, 'I'm a deist/theist' now. So please address all the counter points made, in my last post to you, or admit that you have absolutely no basis, above and beyond anyone else, to safely justify your own belief.

So again, if you care to address post #60, please do

I'm not obliged to respond to everything you say, also i have so much reasons to believe but i can't prove them to you, but for me is a big deal to express to everyone that God exist because he has done things and he is a reality, and everyone should know this.

 

[MrsFoundit]

Many Muslims will say the exact same thing as you. Why are they incorrect?

You had to edit my words to ask this, it is not a valid question.

 

[cvanwey]

I am answering a question about how a process happens, because that is what you asked about. If someone is already a theist, they end up from there to Christian by realising it is the God Christians also know about that they have discovered.

I stated/asked "So I guess we are back to square one...? How does a deist/theist jump from merely believing in [a] god, to your specific God, the God of Christianity?"

For which you responded "By realising that that the people who already are Christians are people who believe in the same one. Hence "We believe in ONE God". "We" is not "I", we say the Nicene Creed/CF Statement of Faith together in groups, we do not all say "I believe..." at the same time, we could, but we do not."

For which I then stated/asked "The number of believers does not make something true. Or does it?"

And now your last response above... For which I now respond...

It is already no question or no contest that some come to Christianity. That is not the question, because the fact that 2 billion + label themselves a Christian, already answers that.

Again, I asked how does a deist/theist leap from general belief, to the <Christian God>? Your answers does not address this. Again, I already know some are Christians.

How did they get their? What metric did they use? Why is <this method> superior to the metric or rubric used to believe in some opposing belief/faith?

 

[NBB]

I stated/asked "So I guess we are back to square one...? How does a deist/theist jump from merely believing in [a] god, to your specific God, the God of Christianity?"

For which you responded "By realising that that the people who already are Christians are people who believe in the same one. Hence "We believe in ONE God". "We" is not "I", we say the Nicene Creed/CF Statement of Faith together in groups, we do not all say "I believe..." at the same time, we could, but we do not."

For which I then stated/asked "The number of believers does not make something true. Or does it?"

And now your last response above... For which I now respond...

It is already no question or no contest that some come to Christianity. That is not the question, because the fact that 2 billion + label themselves a Christian, already answers that.

Again, I asked how does a deist/theist leap from general belief, to the <Christian God>? Your answers does not address this. Again, I already know some are Christians.

How did they get their? What metric did they use? Why is <this method> superior to the metric or rubric used to believe in some opposing belief/faith?

Seek and you will find.

 

[cvanwey]

I'm not obliged to respond to everything you say, also i have so much reasons to believe but i can't prove them to you, but for me is a big deal to express to everyone that God exist because he has done things and he is a reality, and everyone should know this.

Please look at your response from my chair for a moment. Please?

Say you pose a question to a Muslim, and you receive this exact response. Please tell me why the Muslim could not furnish the 'exact' same response (i.e.) their response to you:

"I'm not obliged to respond to everything you say, also i have so much reasons to believe but i can't prove them to you, but for me is a big deal to express to everyone that God exist because he has done things and he is a reality, and everyone should know this."

In the mean time, I'll be awaiting a response for post #60 :)

 

[NBB]

Please look at your response from my chair for a moment. Please?

Say you pose a question to a Muslim, and you receive this exact response. Please tell me why the Muslim could not furnish the 'exact' same response (i.e.) from the Muslim:

"I'm not obliged to respond to everything you say, also i have so much reasons to believe but i can't prove them to you, but for me is a big deal to express to everyone that God exist because he has done things and he is a reality, and everyone should know this."

Either the christians or the muslim is wrong, try find the truth.

Also i don't think muslims experience the same things as christians.
Is not arrogant to say because what i experienced with the Holy spirit, that the muslims are not experiencing things from God.

 

[cvanwey]

You had to edit my words to ask this, it is not a valid question.

It's quite valid. Again, your words:

"I know which works for me". Everything after this is a redirect to another subject/topic.

It is plenty to ask a follow up question... Why does the above assertion not work equally as well for the Muslim?

 

[cvanwey]

Either the christians or the muslim is wrong, try find the truth.

Also i don't think muslims experience the same things as christians.

In one breath, you claim you don't know what they experience. But in another, you state it is not what the Christians experience. Which one are you going to concede?

Is not arrogant to say because what i experienced with the Holy spirit, that the muslims are not experiencing things from God.

It is, because you claim you are right, and they are wrong, and thus far, have absolutely no basis for this assertion. You are being ethnocentric.

Post #60 please All addressed there. Thank you

 

[MrsFoundit]

[[/COLOR]"cvanwey, post: 74706292, member: 409550"]
"I know which works for me". Everything after this is a redirect to another subject/topic.

I do not think asking why we need to know is another topic, I am asking why we need to know who is right precisely about the topic.

Your question is not valid, because I cannot speak for an adherent to Islam and nor can you.

I also object to the premise of your last question, it appears to be based on the assumption that there is an entirely objective, impersonal means of establishing a world view and assessing possibilities without bias. I do not accept this can be done. (My apologies if you do not believe this, feel free to explain.)

 

[cvanwey]

Seek and you will find.

That's partially the point. People conclude differing beliefs. You claim yours is right, and theirs is mistaken. And yet, when I press you, you have absolutely no basis for your conclusion above and beyond that of an opposing faith. So the question then becomes...

Was [your] 'seeking' justified? Or does it instead reveal, maybe, fallacious reasoning?

 

[cvanwey]

I do not think asking why we need to know is another topic, I am asking why we need to know who is right precisely about the topic.

Please let me explain...

"I know which works for me", now if I believe in freedom of world view as a human right, why do we need to know which one is "false"?

So that a skeptic could believe it without needing to worry about what seems absurd to some people ?"

Red is an baseless assertion, which leads us absolutely no closer to truth, verses an opposing asserted belief in THE claimed one true god.

Green is an opinion about human rights. It leads us down to the 'moral argument'. I've already conceded this argument, remember the OP The moral argument gets us no closer to your god, verses another. Hence, you ultimately have to turn to the Bible to state your 'objective standards'. And to do so, you need to prove that God actually inspired this standard. Just like the believers of the Qur'an do.

So again, why is knowing what works for you any 'better' or 'worse' than what works for your neighbor, whom is religion X? Again, we are trying to figure out how one jumps from deism/theism to Christianity? See below...

Your question is not valid, because I cannot speak for an adherent to Islam and nor can you.

Yes it is valid, explained above....

If you cannot speak for Islam, nor can I, then how do you know to state... 'I know my belief works for me', is sufficient?

I also object to the premise of your last question, it appears to be based on the assumption that there is an entirely objective, impersonal means of establishing a world view and assessing possibilities without bias. I do not accept this can be done. (My apologies if you do not believe this, feel free to explain.)

Okay. Then again, how is stating that "I know what works for me", is any better than your neighbor, whom claims an opposing religious assertion?

Seems, all we are left with, might be 'faith'? And do we really want to examine this trait in depth, when trying to evaluate what is true?

 

[MrsFoundit]

It is, because you claim you are right, and they are wrong, and thus far, have absolutely no basis for this assertion. You are being ethnocentric.

Personal conviction is not "no basis". It is inadequate to oblige another to agree.

Your own position is as much in conflict with millions of others as any specific to a religion.

A personal experience inspiring someone of a personal opinion does not amount to a preconceived idea about another culture, it is not ethnocentric, it just subjective.

 

[MrsFoundit]

If you cannot speak for Islam, nor can I, then how do you know to state... 'I know my belief works for me', is sufficient?

Sufficient for what?