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.
I clearly directed the post to the person I quoted, though I'm not beyond you commenting if you think there's something worth discussing in what I said
Hey hey you
Well im not hesitant to have a conversation with you my new friend
If i was to say, "have a taste of God and see if he is good". Would you give faith a shot and pursue Him, and seek Him out. So you can find out once and for all if He truly exists?
Cheers
Please excuse me.
1. I would like you to please explain to me, why do accept one thing but reject the other? - Please provide your reason with a detailed explanation.
Please dont be shy and do not ignore answering. Thank you in advance.
Reason - a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event.
To reason - the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgements logically.
The Holy Spirit confirms this truth of Jesus.
3. What you think about my reply?
Evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
4. Eye witness account and the Bible. What do you think about this reply?
I wont ignore questions if you do not, please answer the original substance ie -
I would like you to please explain to me, why do accept one thing but reject the other? - Please provide your reason with a detailed explanation. I have numbered the questions. It started off as one and now it has grown to 4.
Failure to answer may seem suspect.
I'll do you one better
Post #303:
- Any/all historical reports have to be acknowledged as fallible.
- Reported sources, which stem from a particular bias - (politically or socially), tend to lend less plausible 'objective' credibility.
- Reported events, which defy the laws of physics, tend to lend less plausible credibility.
- Hearsay is usually less reliable than first hand reports.
- Such events supported by relevant concrete relics add to the possible veracity...
- Claimed events are independently corroborated, via eyewitness attestation.
- Eyewitness attestations are reported contemporarily.
- Original source documents are preserved, where applicable.
Maybe others, but this is all I can recall off the top of my head...
I trust post #303 will suffice?
Now, getting to your reason/justification (for) a resurrection. I too agree that eyewitness attestation might be one of the only ways to 'validate' a claimed one time event in the past.
So, seeing that we might agree on a major component to the validation process for such an event, and now taking into account (my) given criteria for evaluating past claimed events, via direct/first-hand eyewitness attestation, do you now wish to explore your claim regarding such an event?
If God is such that you can just be casual with it, then it doesn't suggest the entity in question is as serious and important as you claim it to be.
Not to mention I feel no desire for such a thing in the first place, any "spiritual"
aspects constrained to mindfulness meditation or such, nothing speculative or mystical, relying on mere feelings and being drawn around by the proverbial nose
I was raised Christian, it's not as if I didn't do the conversion and such, but even with the knowledge I have from studying religion and theology in my college years,
I don't find it any more compelling, quite the contrary, it's generally just an unpleasant idea that leads to depression, self loathing, moralizing, any fulfillment someone has not remotely caused by "God", but merely correlated to it by inference.
You presented God as something you could just "try", the fault is in your framing of the entity in question and why I should just sample it like a new flavor of ice creamMy dear that is not an example of sound logic.
Much of that depends on what you even define as spiritual. Me introspecting about my self in some sense could be said to be spiritual, but generally it's not defined that way, so it becomes such that I don't find it compelling in the first place anymore than a desire to do recreational drugsWhat would make you desire to seek what is spiritual?
What are you drawn around? What have you got that makes you so convinced that there is no use?
As a Christian, what did you do for God? Did you seek Him out with all your heart and all you mind?
Did you open your heart to God and admit He is your salvation?
Did you love Him?
Did you give yourself to God as a covenant?
What was being a Christian to you, back then?
Maybe if you asked more specific questions than just why, as if my explanation will satisfy you in the first place rather than potentially just play into you think I was never really open to such things. What are you asking about in particular that I wasn't feeling? I never found a need to pray because I didn't feel the desire to find an external solution to my problems of that nature rather than asking others for assistance and getting some reliable responseWhy did you feel these things? Give me a detailed explanation with much depth?
What, how and why will do nicely.
Why do they need to be acknowledged as fallible?
Why is this so?
Why is this so?
I agree in a limited form. What hearsay do you disagree with in particular?
Does archeology convince you?
You might as well throw out much of history there.
Are the Gospels considered an eye witness? If not, why not?
Wow, you have set such a standard for yourself.
So what would you need here to accept that Jesus is your salvation?
Jesus in the Antiquities, found in Book 18, states that Jesus was the Messiah and a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate.
What say you?
Why or how can you justify?
How should i proceed? What is needed here?
Are you suggesting you accept one and reject the other because you accept eye witness testimony?
2. Explain to me why there is required extra evidence for the claims that He rose from the dead 3 days later?
You seemed to ignore this question. Please address it?
Icon - "The Holy Spirit confirms this truth of Jesus."
3. What you think about my reply?
4. Eye witness account and the Bible. What do you think about this reply?
Before we proceed, you asked for [my criteria]. Moving forward...
The claim(s) needs to be fallible and/or falsifiable. Remember, I stated this is all I can think of off the top of my head... Rarely is someone pressed for their detailed criteria of discerning something being 'true/false'. It's a work in progress. Please bare with me
Going back to the above, if it is not acknowledged, then you can assert whatever you want, and all we can do, on the receiving end, is shrug our shoulders.
Further, if the assertion is 'true', simply because it says so, then I gather I do not need to explain how this is circular.
Let me return your question with yet another pointed question(s)...
Would you agree that the later Bible writers were already believers?
Would you also agree, that we do not seem have located any contemporary accounts, of seeing a man claiming He is the Messiah, and claiming He returned from the dead, as black/white historical conjecture?
Meaning, they neither believed/disbelieved, but merely reported/recorded seen events - ( a man making this claim).
Would you also agree that the only accounts we have, of a Man rising from His grave, is from the later Bible/Gospel accounts themselves?
If so, this means plausible bias.
Your trustworthy best friend tells you he went to the store and was mugged on the way there. You might believe him without further inquiry.
Your same trustworthy best friend tells you he floated up to the top of the Empire State building with no aid of any kind. I trust you would not accept this claim without (more) evidence.
Before I answer, let me clarify something for you.
I'm going to grant you some 'givens', without any contest
Jesus was born. Jesus preached. Jesus died on a cross.
Moving forward, the accounts in the Bible are basically hearsay for anything which defies physics.
Again, you could argue then I MUST disregard all events from antiquity.
But please understand. We do not even have any secured reports of such miracles outside the Bible itself.
The Bible was likely written from bias.
You could argue that the Bible writers wrote from bias, because they receive direct witness to the events, which causes their bias.
But, this is clearly not true.
The Gospels were written later, likely not from eyewitness attestations directly. Hence, from hearsay or presupposition.
Depends on the situation. And also depends on the type of found 'findings.' But it seems to me one criteria which could/can help support the claim. See below...
No. Like I stated above. I will blindly accept that Jesus lived and dies. Just like I do with 'Alexander the Great'.
But the claims which defy the laws of physics need more for me.
Likely not.
eyewitness - "a person who has personally seen something happen and so can give a first-hand description of it"
We do not know who wrote the Gospels?
I would first need evidence undergoing such criteria listed above, that He rose from the dead after being dead for three days. Can you produce any specifics to support as such?
Generalizations of stating 'the Bible' and 'eyewitnesses', is not specific.
Again, I will blindly accept He was born, preached, and died. Seems little bias would stand to loose/gain much from such a claim.
However, 'conformation' of Him being a Messiah, is a resurrection claim. Do we have any attestations, outside of bias, proclaiming as such; that they saw a man/being simply claiming to have risen from the dead after 3 days?
And hopefully a least few of them?
Or do we instead only have the Bible, likely written from later people whom already believed it?
Which is hearsay... "information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor." Or, "the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.
It's the difference between consulting two historical references...
The first stating Jesus returned from the dead and proved He was the Messiah. Versus the second historical reference, which states I was minding my own business, and a man claiming to be the Messiah contacted me. I did not know what to think, but it was interesting.
Or maybe...
The first reports that Jesus was born at this time, and some people believed He was more than a man. Verses the second, which states Jesus was born, and is our Messiah.
I'll give you an example....
Jesus returns from the dead.
Hands out Bibles, written in a way no one has even yet seen (type written, other etc...). They are also indestructible. He hands them out to many people across the globe. This would raise MAJOR pause for me
1. Concrete relic
2. Original source documents preserved
3. Global reports of having the same document, written by an agent outside current capable technology
But instead, God's choice is to let things unfold the every other claimed event goes down in history. Relies upon faith instead, as the lynch pin.
What'za got? Any specifics?
Please see above
No, I did not ignore it. But I'll play your game
It defies the laws of physics. Outside the Gospel accounts,
which are likely written from the classic definition of hearsay,
do we have actual eyewitness attestation of a man claiming He is the Messiah, after rising from the dead three days later?
You appear to have presented a mere assertion. The onus is on you to support this claim. Again, what'za got specifically?
Not much. Please demonstrate these eyewitnesses?
You presented God as something you could just "try",the fault is in your framing of the entity in question and why I should just sample it like a new flavor of ice cream
Much of that depends on what you even define as spiritual.
Me introspecting about my self in some sense could be said to be spiritual, but generally it's not defined that way, so it becomes such that I don't find it compelling in the first place anymore than a desire to do recreational drugs
I'm not drawn around, I have feelings and I respond to them tempered with reason. I see no use, I'm not convinced there is absolutely no use, that's not what I said
I was really just pushed into it, but even with knowledge and understanding I have now, I see no reason to engage with Christianity as true,
because I find the ideas within it generally abhorrent, particularly the focus on an external source of meaning and generally regarding this life as utterly pointless except as it glorifies the entity from which we derive meaning,
generally a misanthropic self loathing worldview I want no part of and see no real improvement in people that cannot be attributed to incidental aspects of Christianity that aren't unique to it
Maybe if you asked more specific questions than just why, as if my explanation will satisfy you in the first place rather than potentially just play into you think I was never really open to such things.
What are you asking about in particular that I wasn't feeling?
I never found a need to pray because I didn't feel the desire to find an external solution to my problems of that nature rather than asking others for assistance and getting some reliable response
I studied religion in college
and continue to investigate it as a phenomenon,
but I'm still nowhere closer to being convinced of the truth of any supernatural entities, events,
etc because I don't find the conclusion that particular things are evidence convincing. But more fundamental to that is the incoherency of religious/spiritual claims in the first place, no consistency and not even a critical examination of it that doesn't tend to engage in cognitive dissonance to ignore contradictions within the supposedly thorough system they believe in.
God is the worst offender in the transcendent nature, yet it supposedly intervenes, created the world, cares about humanity, but is supposed to be a perfect entity, so it creates a logical contradiction in the qualities possessed.
ill give you my testimony.
I was in church many years ago, i was with 2 older ladies, we were praying together and i was having 'hands laid on me'. These women were Spirit filled.
All of a sudden i went into a vision. I had my eyes closed, slumped forward and in deep prayed. I was in a fixed state. I found myself soaring like a bird above the vast land. I could feel the wind and a sense of altitude - im scared of heights so i practically froze.
After what felt like minutes a mustered up the strength to look around and started to gain some form of comfort. I noticed an active volcano in the distance but did not think too much about it - dude im flying!!!
I started to realise i was heading straight for this spewing volcano and started to become concerned. I couldnt move my body or redirect my trajectory, I was trying to toss my body and do what ever i could. No good!
Just as i was about to hit the lava i cried out 'Jesus' (save me). Instantly i stopped yards from the lava, i can remember the sensation of heat and a sense of fatigue and relief. I was pulled up - like a beam or like invisible hands - and put back into the sky and continued to fly.
Once i started to fly again the 2nd last thing i saw, where hills amongst mountain tips with someform of ruins or old buildings.
Then suddenly 'my screen' was burned and i was presented with new surroundings. I saw 3 silhouettes of human like figures but the 2 outside ones were overlaped with the middle one - which was larger than the other 2.
There was fire everywhere. It seemed though i was standing in this fire with the 3. I could hear the crackle and sizzle of fire, all i could do was stare at the silhouette in front of me. I dont think i even blinked, it was speechless and frozen.
Then the fire started to simmer down and i 'came to'. The ladies looked concerned, their eyes were wide open with a look of shock. They asked me what happened and am i ok. I told them what happened casually and went back into the congression.
I was changed, i felt completely different in my mind. It felt like i had something in my heart and i knew how to orientate my heart to God.
I was given the Holy Spirit!!!
Now i know that you will say personal experience are not verifiable proof but indulge me, what do you think about this?
My turn
Great. This is what I was waiting for.
Wait? How do you know they were 'spirit filled'?
Okay, an unfalsifiable claim. Great
More unfalsifiable claims. Great.
More of the same.
What would you have to say about all testimonials, whom also claim such contact, while praying to an opposing entity? Are only the Christian claims 'true'? Or, do you accept them all as valid? Meaning, all testimonies are told in earnest, but maybe some/all are mistaken about the 'source'?
Well, I prayed for 30+ years, in all sorts of ways, and never felt anything other than me speaking to myself. Hence, did God pass over me? Or, am I too inept to realize His contact? Or maybe, there exists no God actually listening?
If I thought this truly happened to me as well, I might think the same thing as you?
Simple. You believe and trust you received contact from your presupposed God. But what about all the ones whom claim the same, in earnest, while praying to a differing God?
Further, you trust/believe this God exists, hence, you are likely going to already believe all such tales, as told in the Bible
Now indulge me. I prayed for 30 years, and did not experience anything remotely close.
Hey hey
Why cant you try God and sample Him like a new flavour of ice cream?
What do you know about the nature of God - - - that im missing?
Ill go by what the dictionary says.
Spiritual - relating to religion or religious belief.
You did not answer the question and seem to have gotten distracted.
What would make you desire to seek what is spiritual?
You know what you wont accept, do you knw what you would accept? That is the core of this question. Not drugs or how you define the word spiritual.
Because reason is self correcting and acknowledges limits rather than just relying on plausibility and credulity, which allows you to believe anything, it's unreliable.What is it about reason that makes it such an authority to you?
Why are you not absolutely convinced that there is no use? Why?
I'd say you had an experience you attribute to the Holy Spirit, but I doubt you can demonstrate it it a way that isn't reducible to your experiences and interpretation of them rather than something that can be investigated in a falsifiable sense that would show this experience to be a mistaken understanding of something that is more natural in essence (self deception, etc)Fair enough. What would you say if i made a statement such as 'I received the Holy Spirit through faith in Jesus Christ'.
What would you say?
Where is this in scripture?
What references do you have to back up such a notion?
Sorry this part is quite confused to me. Could you re word this statement?
You said - "I don't find it any more compelling, quite the contrary, it's generally just an unpleasant idea that leads to depression, self loathing, moralizing, any fulfillment someone has not remotely caused by "God", but merely correlated to it by inference."
I asked - " Why did you feel these things? Give me a detailed explanation with much depth?
What, how and why will do nicely."
I dont know how to get more specific then asking why do you feel these feelings.
How about this.
Why is it an unpleasant idea that leads to
depression, self loathing, moralizing, etc?
Have you ever considered that prayer is communication with God rather than someone who can grant you wishes?
I always pray and found a need for it. What you think?
Because I found it interesting in understanding human thought better and enriched my understanding, even if I really didn't have a faith in which to have more investment for that study.Why did you?
Wait a minute.
Phenomenon - a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.
Why did you use that word?
Does God exist its just the explanation is not clear to you?
What have you done to seek out the truth - so as to be systematic and methodical?
What would you have to do to seek out God and be certain He does or does not exist?
What incoherence do you refer to?
What is not consistent?
What critical examination should be performed?
What contradictions should i be aware of?
What does cognitive dissonance have to do with your answer?
I disagree. How is a logical contradiction applied here?
Cheers
Hey hey cvanwey
Hopefully this isnt your only reply, its seems to be lacking and there is much that you seem to ignore.
Are you willing to reply to my whole post, instead of choosing what you want to pay attention to?
Cheers
You stated it all boils down to 'trust'. You stated you 'believe' it happened. Fine. I don't. Based upon the way you answered all of the above, it would appear we could 'argue/debate/other' until the cows come home. You already believe Jesus has contacted you personally.
Based upon your response, I am now following you down your provided path. I now ask you again:
Many people claim they have been contacted by 'god(s)/other', just like you.
Many of these people are earnest in stating they received contact, while praying to an opposing entity/other. Thus, I ask you again.
How do you know your god contact was the real-deal, while all the ones whom claim they received contact from an opposing god(s)/other, are mistaken?
I don't claim to know anything about God
and I don't think it's comparable to ice cream, because ice cream is demonstrable, tangible, etc, God is conceptual at best in experience of it
That generally just obfuscates, because spirit is used esoterically in Christianity to not mean what the dictionary claims, so you're not exactly helping
I would accept something that's consistent in a sense that isn't subject to my mistaken methodology
or such from confirmation bias.
God being able to "answer" prayers in a way that covers all the bases is not consistent, it's unfalsifiable.
I don't seek spiritual things because they generally are not of real benefit to me in any sense and
are generally also such that they become speculative and not substantive in any meaningful manner
Because reason is self correcting and
acknowledges limits rather than just relying on plausibility and credulity, which allows you to believe anything, it's unreliable.
I'm not absolutely convinced because I'm not possessing of absolute knowledge, simple
I'd say you had an experience you attribute to the Holy Spirit,
but I doubt you can demonstrate it it a way that isn't reducible to your experiences and interpretation of them rather than something that can be investigated in a falsifiable sense
that would show this experience to be a mistaken understanding of something that is more natural in essence (self deception, etc)
Does the bible not refer to us as vessels and use metaphors that make us effectively objects, separating the wheat from the chaff, etc?
I don't have the time to find the references, but honestly, if you think that we are supposed to be meaningful in ourselves,
that would contradict the idea 1) that we are in God's image and 2)
that we are meant to relate to God for life to have meaning, both of which make us means rather than ends in ourselves
I don't feel a need to commune with an external force that I cannot reliably consider is actually communicating with me,
like a friend through chat that isn't chatting in a way uncharacteristic of them, or, if possible, face to face or through written communication
Because I found it interesting in understanding human thought better and enriched my understanding, even if I really didn't have a faith in which to have more investment for that study.
God is a phenomenon in that people ascribe such things to it that we don't necessarily need it to explain (nature, etc). A phenomenon in the sociological, psychological sense, is not the same as in the empirical sense
I've read much in regards to religion and theology and considered it in relation to other things I have studied
You'd have to first demonstrate God as a cogent concept that isn't subject to redefinition due to the spiritual and unfalsifiable nature that comes with an entity that is perfect, etc
If you are taking your experiences and using the Bible as the filter by which to determine what they are, you're not being critical,
you're being narrow to a point that would seem to suggest you're confident in the Bible's reliability, which is not demonstrable by your convictions
Cognitive dissonance is holding contradictory beliefs while not necessarily realizing it, such as God existing, but that you also have freewill
A perfect entity should logically have no reason to create and certainly not human emotions in the sense of love and desire for relationship, because it would be self sufficient.
I find it unfair that you completely ignored my post and find it suspect that you were not willing to defend your own position. It shows little respect for me and the effort i put it.
You do not want to defend your position.
Home work for you.
1. What logical faalacy is committed when you avoid having to engage with critical questions by turning it back on the questioner?
Anyways i forgive you. If you dont like the setup of the chess pieces and want a reset, all you had to do was ask.
I still wanna play ball and will accommodate this unfortunate turn of events.
Actually what i claim is that; i heard about Jesus and what He offered. I wanted what was on offer. I asked for it with 100% faith and was given the gift of the Holy Spirit. Through the Holy Spirit i have a relationship with God.
Many people have done such a thing and have gotten the gift. Just like me.
2. Is your question; since there are competing religion's, how do i know i got the right one when others have declared they are in contact with other Gods?
I disagree.
Somewhere berried within one of your responses, you stated you believe and trust. You also stated Jesus contacted you directly, and you provided a story.
THUS, we could go back and forth, arguing the 'veracity' of Biblical passages again and again, to no avail.
I'm going to concede, that my parameters and/or metrics for evaluating 'claimed facts', will have no bearing here for you.
I have identified early, with you, that you believe what the Bible attests to, is already true. And I also believe you believe/trust this.
Moving forward, I then feel the next logical direction, moving forward with any productivity, is/was as follows.... See below
Would likely be a waste of time.... Probably the only way I could 'unconvince' you would be 'proving' you are in the Matrix, or, you were temporarily hallucinating, or maybe other... And I doubt this will happen.
No thanks... Unwarranted and unnecessary...
Has nothing to do with 'like/dislike'... Based upon your response, I have experience enough to know further exchange would yield little/no movement, if continuing down the same road.
Depending on how you respond here, I might want to continue in this exchange as well
Then I have little more to say, just like the thread I created a year and a half ago 'Knowledge' of Existence
If you 'know' you receive contact, then nothing will sway you otherwise. For [you], 'Jesus is real, and thus the Bible is true.'
Pretty much, I guess. But to elaborate...
You pray to Jesus, and claim contact.
Someone else prays to say... Vishnu/Shiva, or other, and claims contact.
Or even yet, maybe a 'medium' claims they receive contact from other's dead relatives, as the medium 'summons' them.
Say you are all earnest with your claim(s) to contact. You all have complete belief/trust. Are all of you actually 'correct'?
How do you verify authenticity?
Then you have made it even easier for me. You are debating me about a subject you have no knowledge of.
God is thought of and is not demonstrable in any tangible sense we have for plenty of other concepts that are also real (a plant, a rock, etc)Demonstrable - "clearly apparent or capable of being logically proved."
Ill choose the opposite of tangible - intangible.
Intangible - "unable to be touched; not having physical presence."
Conceptual - "relating to or based on mental concepts."
How is God based on mental concepts? How do you know this for certain if you are uninformed about the nature of God?
I agree that God is intangible in touch. Intangible does not eliminate the fact that something happened or something exists.
Customer service is intangible. Ice cream is tangible. I can try both cannot i not?
Ps God is not like a Bricklayer Who builds a house and then bricks Himself in. Would you build something only to be bound by it?
What do you think about this in relation to the existence of God?
There isn't a singular Christian POV, that's where you're mistaken in the first placeWhat should the definition of spiritual be to you and i - for use in our discussion?
What does spiritual mean from a Christian pov?
Such as? Got an example?
Ps - pls be careful when you make remarks suggesting you have a mistaken methodology. That says to me you are doubtful of your own reasoning ability and completely harms your credibility.
If one is unwilling to consider alternate explanations and just insists on one, that's confirmation bias in regards to the experienceWhat has confirmation bias got to do with you having an experience?
If God can answer a prayer in a way that is effectively able to cover the negative, positive or a later "fulfillment", like you wanting help with financial difficulties, it means that if you get something good, bad or something good happens later, you can attribute all of them to God's planSuch as? Got an example?
Why are no benefit to you? Please give an example?
It considers things apart from an initial assessment and thinks that there can be other explanations. I think I see someone as I walk down a dimly lit street, but reason tells me that I may be hallucinating because of the lighting and such, and sure enough, I don't see anyone with a second look.How is reasoning seld correcting?
Reason - the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way.
The human mind forms conclusions. What is it about this process that makes it an authority to you and i?
Do you trust your own process of reasoning or do you trust someone else ability to reason for you?
Atheists trust reason but acknowledge that humans are extremely likely to suffer from faulty reasoning. You just remarked about having a mistaken methodology and confimation bias.
How do reconcile your trust in reason when humans - like you - make conclusions?
Seeking to falsify it by investigation. If I think I saw something, I investigate it repeatedly and, at least provisionally, if it isn't happening, I can conclude I was hallucinating or otherwise mistaken in my assessmentSo how do you confirm something is the case or not the case?
Why do you think that you can just make an argument from ignorance? I don't take the Holy Spirit seriously as its own entity rather than people attributing experiences they cannot personally explain to such nebulous supernatural forces, you've failed to demonstrate why I should take the Holy Spirit seriously apart from personal testimony, which is demonstrably fallible in itself without further investigationWhy cant it be the Holy Spirit? What do you know that i dont?
I'm not testing for something I don't think is cogent in the first place, I have threads discussing this problem, you're assuming I already have some base understanding of God that isn't subject to any problems of observation or coherency, etc. Burden of proof is on you to show how your concept is anything more than a human conception of things that we want absolute certainty onWell lets try this out. How would you go about testing such a thing?
I say i have been given the Holy Spirit by accepting Jesus Christ as salvation. How would you - as an investigator of truth and a man of 'science' - seek to find if im lying or telling the truth?
What methods would you use to test for God?
You said - "because I find the ideas within it generally abhorrent, particularly the focus on an external source of meaning and generally regarding this life as utterly pointless except as it glorifies the entity from which we derive meaning"
I said - "Where is this in scripture? What references do you have to back up such a notion?"
You say - "Does the bible not refer to us as vessels and use metaphors that make us effectively objects, separating the wheat from the chaff, etc?"
You seem confused and have gotten yourself distracted.
Wanna another shot at it?
You said - "because I find the ideas within it generally abhorrent, particularly the focus on an external source of meaning and generally regarding this life as utterly pointless except as it glorifies the entity from which we derive meaning"
I said - "Where is this in scripture? What references do you have to back up such a notion?"
You say - " I don't have the time to find the references, but honestly, if you think that we are supposed to be meaningful in ourselves,"
You have plenty of time to do so and ill patiently wait weeks for it.
Did you not study theology at college? Anyways, i want you to do what you said you can do.
Do it.
If we are reflections of God, then why are we such poor reflections? It really just gets into the psychological implications that God is a construct for us to pacify our insecurities because of not being 100% certain on thingsYou have gone right off track. How does what you suggest contradict that you and i are made in God's image?
So technically you would lose nothing from trying and proving it to yourself?
What about your afterlife?
Yeah, at least in terms of explanations from Chrsitians like yourself, that's not convincing, that's an appeal to obey authority in itself rather than showing the merit of the so called authority in the first place. Why should I obey your deity at all, even if I granted some nominal existence for the sake of argument?Have you considered that God has decreed the way to come to.him and you come to God on His terms, not your own?
People can find fulfillment in mystical nonsense and general reduction of existence to supernatural phenomena interacting with the mundaneWhat did you learn about human understanding and how did it enrich your life?
Empirical entails an ability to measure and study more directly like in the natural sciences, but the term has potentially more broad implicationsHow is a phenomenon in the sociological, psychological sense, not the same as in the empirical sense?
1. What have you done to seek out the truth - so as to be systematic and methodical? You read about religion and theology.
I wouldnt call it systematic. You didnt follow the criteria of Christian faith. Would you agree that to be absolutely certain you must try it, the way it is prescribed?
What would you have to do to seek out God and be certain He does or does not exist? You didnt really answer this one?
What would be a good start? How could a appease yoir criteria? What is needed? Please give some examples?
I heard about Jesus and what He offered. I wanted what was on offer. I asked for it with 100% faith and was given the gift of the Holy Spirit. Through the Holy Spirit i have a relationship with God. Many people have done such a thing and have gotten the gift. Just like me.
I got the truth and im 100% certain.
You assume that i have not asked questions about my faith or have been critical. Once you experience something like i have, you know.
I was changed, i felt completely different in my mind. It felt like i had something in my heart and i knew how to orientate my heart to God.
I was given the Holy Spirit!!!
What would you do and how would you think it that happened to you?
That you are just believing in it because you conclude it must be true based on claims within it, which is circular reasoning, appealing to the Bible to prove the bible's claims itselfI have 100% trust in the Bible.
What is not demonstrable about my convictions?
Not sure if you can claim expertise when you're claiming 100% certainty, an unrealistic standard in itselfHow is it a contradiction that God exists yet I have free will?
Do you suggest that God is a puppet master?
Im starting to doubt your knowledge of Christian doctrine. It seems more like you are trying to debate something you have no knowledge of.
I want you to argue this point. How is this so and why should i listen to you?
Why not?
The logical fallacy committed when you avoid having to engage with critical questions by turning it back on the questioner is called tu quoque.
You have little to say. I have lots to say.
Well lets compare. Have you an example of what you are claiming?
My testimony in case you want to further examine
I was in church many years ago, i was with 2 older ladies, we were praying together and i was having 'hands laid on me'. These women were Spirit filled.
All of a sudden i went into a vision. I had my eyes closed, slumped forward and in deep prayed. I was in a fixed state. I found myself soaring like a bird above the vast land. I could feel the wind and a sense of altitude - im scared of heights so i practically froze.
After what felt like minutes a mustered up the strength to look around and started to gain some form of comfort. I noticed an active volcano in the distance but did not think too much about it - dude im flying!!!
I started to realise i was heading straight for this spewing volcano and started to become concerned. I couldnt move my body or redirect my trajectory, I was trying to toss my body and do what ever i could. No good!
Just as i was about to hit the lava i cried out 'Jesus' (save me). Instantly i stopped yards from the lava, i can remember the sensation of heat and a sense of fatigue and relief. I was pulled up - like a beam or like invisible hands - and put back into the sky and continued to fly.
Once i started to fly again the 2nd last thing i saw, where hills amongst mountain tips with someform of ruins or old buildings.
Then suddenly 'my screen' was burned and i was presented with new surroundings. I saw 3 silhouettes of human like figures but the 2 outside ones were overlaped with the middle one - which was larger than the other 2.
There was fire everywhere. It seemed though i was standing in this fire with the 3. I could hear the crackle and sizzle of fire, all i could do was stare at the silhouette in front of me. I dont think i even blinked, it was speechless and frozen.
Then the fire started to simmer down and i 'came to'. The ladies looked concerned, their eyes were wide open with a look of shock. They asked me what happened and am i ok. I told them what happened casually and went back into the congression.
I was changed, i felt completely different in my mind. It felt like i had something in my heart and i knew how to orientate my heart to God.
I was given the Holy Spirit!!!
Now i know that you will say personal experience are not verifiable proof but indulge me, what do you think about this?
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?