True Believers

[Davian]

God has been quite detectable to billions and billions throughout the ages of the evolution of mankind.

Yet not one can demonstrate that deities are anything more than a product of their imagination. Correct?

He's not detectable to you because you don't desire for God to be in your life.

Ah, the power of circular reasoning. A formidable weapon in the hands of a theist. Only those that believe in gods can detect gods.

When you tell someone what they are thinking, and you are wrong, you are still wrong.

God absolutely refuses to violate the mind arena of choice that he gifted you with.

How do you know this? Does your god just happen to think just like you? Or it is simply imaginary?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

"Religion, the conviction-faith of the personality, can always triumph over the superficially contradictory logic of despair born in the unbelieving material mind. There really is a true and genuine inner voice, that “true light which lights every man who comes into the world.” And this spirit leading is distinct from the ethical prompting of human conscience. The feeling of religious assurance is more than an emotional feeling. The assurance of religion transcends the reason of the mind, even the logic of philosophy. Religion is faith, trust, and assurance."​

UB 1955

 

[Colter]

Yet not one can demonstrate that deities are anything more than a product of their imagination. Correct?

Ah, the power of circular reasoning. A formidable weapon in the hands of a theist. Only those that believe in gods can detect gods.

When you tell someone what they are thinking, and you are wrong, you are still wrong.

How do you know this? Does your god just happen to think just like you? Or it is simply imaginary?

No, we can't prove our God experience to the stubborn unbeliever in the same way that the existence of love, morality, ethics can be proven beyond intellectual knit picking. The fruits of the spirit are manifest in the life of the believer.

The character fruits of the unbeliever are manifest in the fact of joining a Christian forum to antagonize believers.

No, the will of the human is at times at odds with the will of God as that will is discerned in spirit.

"The very pessimism of the most pessimistic materialist is, in and of itself, sufficient proof that the universe of the pessimist is not wholly material. Both optimism and pessimism are concept reactions in a mind conscious of values as well as of facts. If the universe were truly what the materialist regards it to be, man as a human machine would then be devoid of all conscious recognition of that very fact. Without the consciousness of the concept of values within the spirit-born mind, the fact of universe materialism and the mechanistic phenomena of universe operation would be wholly unrecognized by man. One machine cannot be conscious of the nature or value of another machine."​

 

[Archaeopteryx]

No, we can't prove our God experience to the stubborn unbeliever in the same way that the existence of love, morality, ethics can be proven beyond intellectual knit picking. The fruits of the spirit are manifest in the life of the believer.

The character fruits of the unbeliever are manifest in the fact of joining a Christian forum to antagonize believers.

I can't speak for every nonbeliever, but I joined this site originally as a Christian. Obviously then I didn't join to antagonise believers - I was one! You are being overly presumptuous about people's motivations for being here, which is ironic given that your only purpose for being here is seemingly to post the entirety of the Urantia Book, piece by piece.

 

[quatona]

No, we can't prove our God experience to the stubborn unbeliever in the same way that the existence of love, morality, ethics can be proven beyond intellectual knit picking. The fruits of the spirit are manifest in the life of the believer.

Yeah, great guys you are!

The character fruits of the unbeliever are manifest in the fact of joining a Christian forum to antagonize believers.

...and we are not.
Now that we have that out of the way - could you possibly return to objective arguments?

"The very pessimism of the most pessimistic materialist is, in and of itself, sufficient proof that the universe of the pessimist is not wholly material. Both optimism and pessimism are concept reactions in a mind conscious of values as well as of facts. If the universe were truly what the materialist regards it to be, man as a human machine would then be devoid of all conscious recognition of that very fact. Without the consciousness of the concept of values within the spirit-born mind, the fact of universe materialism and the mechanistic phenomena of universe operation would be wholly unrecognized by man. One machine cannot be conscious of the nature or value of another machine."​

Talk about antagonizing those who don´t agree with you.

I think, though, nobody has ever denied that humans have thoughts, feelings, cognition and consciousness. The point in dispute is merely how they come about.

 

[Colter]

Yeah, great guys you are!

I'm guessing, is this that thing where anti-religious agents focus on the worst actors in religion and proceed as if they are ALL the same in order to justify your work against religion? How can you be intelligent and astute in one post but then go over to another thread and play the broad brush game?

...and we are not.
Now that we have that out of the way - could you possibly return to objective arguments?

Objective arguments about subjective reality?.....and then you rebut with a demand for proof of our subjective experience......and then we are just imagining things therefore......

The pursuit of values precedes the formulation of interpretive beliefs not the other way around. There was not a mathematical breakthrough on behalf of the religionist prior to his search for God that he can retrace to the satisfaction of the skeptic, rather it is through the circumstances of living experience that leads the finite to abandon the ego defenses of his animalistic inheritance opening the path to the light of God.

Talk about antagonizing those who don´t agree with you.

I think, though, nobody has ever denied that humans have thoughts, feelings, cognition and consciousness. The point in dispute is merely how they come about.

Fair enough.

 

[quatona]

I'm guessing, is this that thing where anti-religious agents focus on the worst actors in religion and proceed as if they are ALL the same in order to justify your work against religion? How can you be intelligent and astute in one post but then go over to another thread and play the broad brush game?

Man, you have a way of guessing wrongly!
I didn´t do anything like that, and I didn´t mean to go there because that´s not the way I look at it.

I just paraphrased your own boasting.

Objective arguments about subjective reality?

"Objective" as opposed to e.g. character assassinations, poisoning the wells etc.

.....and then you rebut with a demand for proof of our subjective experience......

Show me where I ever demanded proof of your subjective experience, or retract this statement.

 

[Colter]

Man, you have a way of guessing wrongly!
I didn´t do anything like that, and I didn´t mean to go there because that´s not the way I look at it.

I just paraphrased your own boasting.




"Objective" as opposed to e.g. character assassinations, poisoning the wells etc.


Show me where I ever demanded proof of your subjective experience, or retract this statement.

Then I misunderstood you, I retract the statement.

I don't know that we can discus the subjective experience of spirit born believers objectively. This difficulty is what often leads the anti-religious to promote the non existence of God using his claim of objectivity as an approach to analyzing religion.

Believers are able to discus the subjective experience with one another as we share the subjective God experience in common.

 

[quatona]

Then I misunderstood you, I retract the statement.

Fair enough.

I don't know that we can discus the subjective experience of spirit born believers objectively.

So, on what basis can we discuss it at all - short of one group accepting the subjective experience as being more significant than their own?

This difficulty is what often leads the anti-religious to promote the non existence of God using his claim of objectivity as an approach to analyzing religion.

Just let go of the antagonizing, will you?
I am not anti-religious, I am not promoting the non-existence of a God.
I just don´t know what to do with someone else´s appeal to their subjective reality. It´s your reality, you are invited to keep it. What exactly do you want from me, what do you expect me to do with your claims of the superiourity of your subjective reality?

Believers are able to discus the subjective experience with one another as we share the subjective God experience in common.[/quote]

 

[quatona]

Believers are able to discus the subjective experience with one another as we share the subjective God experience in common.

Well, this is the area of CF dedicated to interaction between Christians and non-Christians.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Then I misunderstood you, I retract the statement.

I don't know that we can discus the subjective experience of spirit born believers objectively. This difficulty is what often leads the anti-religious to promote the non existence of God using his claim of objectivity as an approach to analyzing religion.

Believers are able to discus the subjective experience with one another as we share the subjective God experience in common.

That seems to be all that you share in common. The content or nature of that experience varies greatly from religion to religion and even from believer to believer. The result is a torrent of conflicting supernatural claims, each asserted as incontrovertibly true despite the lack of any objective means for verifying them.

Your complaint seems to be that you are being held to some sort of epistemic standard that you think you should be exempt from simply because the claims you are making are religious in nature. Religious claims are not exempt from scrutiny simply because they are religious.

 

[Colter]

Fair enough.

So, on what basis can we discuss it at all - short of one group accepting the subjective experience as being more significant than their own?

I'm not sure, we run into this a lot, discussions end in a draw when demands for impossible objective proofs can't be met by the religious. Even religious people hadn't thought about their faith to the point of realizing that it wasn't objective proof that lead to their living faith to begin with, so they get all tangled up in the weeds trying to match wits with the scientific approach.

I don't feel that I'm somehow superior to you because of my rebirth, I believe we are both sons of God. In fact there is a saying that there is more joy in heaven over the faith discovery of one lost son then over the good deeds of a thousand righteous people.

God actually comes out looking for his wondering sons.

Just let go of the antagonizing, will you?

Ok

I am not anti-religious, I am not promoting the non-existence of a God.
I just don´t know what to do with someone else´s appeal to their subjective reality. It´s your reality, you are invited to keep it. What exactly do you want from me, what do you expect me to do with your claims of the superiority of your subjective reality?

This is a form of the subjective, what else would you expect? Its not as if we are harassing you at the mall.

 

[quatona]

This is a form of the subjective, what else would you expect? Its not as if we are harassing you at the mall.

I really have problems understanding your defensiveness, Colter. I don´t know - maybe you have a lot of frustrating experiences under your belt.
But these defensive responses leave me frustrated - just in case you care.
I just asked you what you expected me to do with those reports to your subjective reality. I didn´t say you shouldn´t do it, I didn´t say you were harassing me. I´m just wondering about the purpose of doing it (and I am wondering if this strategy really serves this purpose).

 

[Colter]

I really have problems understanding your defensiveness, Colter. I don´t know - maybe you have a lot of frustrating experiences under your belt.
But these defensive responses leave me frustrated - just in case you care.
I just asked you what you expected me to do with those reports to your subjective reality. I didn´t say you shouldn´t do it, I didn´t say you were harassing me. I´m just wondering about the purpose of doing it (and I am wondering if this strategy really serves this purpose).

I think you are assuming degrees of emotion in my responses that aren't there. I admire your articulate abilities, we are not enemies.

While it is true that my experience in general with the Atheist community is, they ask for proof (knowing we can't prove subjectivity) then they use one of 4 or 5 auto-responses that include words like imaginary, assertion, fantasy etc. I question their motives in joining religious forums.

You have 28,800+ replies on this forum, haven't you figured it out yet? We cant prove God sufficiently to you, you will need to find him for yourself or not. Neither appeal to logic or emotion are sufficient to finding God.

I can only share my own rebirth experience, one moment I had no hope, then I had hope. I gave up, but something quite unexpected and illogical happened in my surrender. Rather than falling into deeper despair, another reality invaded my soul, my heart, my mind. Its been there ever since. I've come to know and understand it better. The change was so profound that the people who knew me before don't recognize me now, my own parents were stunned!

 

[PsychoSarah]

God has been quite detectable to billions and billions throughout the ages of the evolution of mankind. He's not detectable to you because you don't desire for God to be in your life. God absolutely refuses to violate the mind arena of choice that he gifted you with.

Another assumption that is absolutely incorrect. Why wouldn't I want to believe in some form of afterlife? What possible benefit is there to me in not believing that should belief actually be a choice? I don't have to take the bible literally, all I would have to do is believe in said deity, and if that belief was solid, I would probably fear death a lot less. However, belief isn't a conscious choice, it doesn't matter how much I want to believe in said deity, or how much I want the doctrine to be true. Just like you couldn't make yourself believe the sky was green, I can't make myself believe in deities. However, should one day the sky actually turn green, or should said deity present itself to me as I have prayed for belief for the past 6 years in some manner that I can be certain of my awareness of its presence, we both would believe each thing respectively.

My desire is to believe, heck, I have even offered to give up entirely on my free will just for a sign I wasn't praying to something that really didn't exist. Nothing ever happens.

 

[Colter]

Another assumption that is absolutely incorrect. Why wouldn't I want to believe in some form of afterlife? What possible benefit is there to me in not believing that should belief actually be a choice? I don't have to take the bible literally, all I would have to do is believe in said deity, and if that belief was solid, I would probably fear death a lot less. However, belief isn't a conscious choice, it doesn't matter how much I want to believe in said deity, or how much I want the doctrine to be true. Just like you couldn't make yourself believe the sky was green, I can't make myself believe in deities. However, should one day the sky actually turn green, or should said deity present itself to me as I have prayed for belief for the past 6 years in some manner that I can be certain of my awareness of its presence, we both would believe each thing respectively.

My desire is to believe, heck, I have even offered to give up entirely on my free will just for a sign I wasn't praying to something that really didn't exist. Nothing ever happens.

Faith itself is a gift, when the pupil is ready the teacher will appear. If you love God with all your heart then I don't know what the reason is that he has not yet touched you with his presence. I know for me it took what it took and not a day sooner.

 

[bhsmte]

Faith itself is a gift, when the pupil is ready the teacher will appear. If you love God with all your heart then I don't know what the reason is that he has not yet touched you with his presence. I know for me it took what it took and not a day sooner.

What do you think it took for the pupils that believe in other Gods than you? Or the pupils who do not believe Jesus was God?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Faith itself is a gift, when the pupil is ready the teacher will appear. If you love God with all your heart then I don't know what the reason is that he has not yet touched you with his presence. I know for me it took what it took and not a day sooner.

If faith is a gift and god actively chooses who gets it, why does said being punish people for never recieving a gift that might never of been offered to them?

 

[Colter]

What do you think it took for the pupils that believe in other Gods than you? Or the pupils who do not believe Jesus was God?

Good questions with obvious implications in light of the claims of exclusivity made by all religious systems with a "chosen people" attitude.

This is my answer:

* God is prepersonal, concepts of the Father will be conditioned by each person who experiences his presence. Religionist should strive for a unity among those who have the experience rather than a theological, doctrinal, dogmatic uniformity.

* The original religion of Jesus was generic, it was intended to be a revelatory meme to enhance all religions for all people over all the earth. Christianity became a religion about ----->Jesus, the Christian church became an institutional replacement for the original, radical, liberating religion of Jesus.

* When Jesus said "I am the way" he was stating a fact, because he has always been the way to the Father; anyone, anywhere, inside or outside of any religion, who seeks God will go through the spiritual gravity of the Son after we leave this world and proceed inward towards our Heavenly Father on Paradise.

This is true because the Paradise creator Sons are the Fathers of their respective creation. To seek God is to do so through the Son weather a person understands these things or not.

All sincere truth seekers received the spirit of truth poured out upon all flesh.

 

[bhsmte]

Good questions with obvious implications in light of the claims of exclusivity made by all religious systems with a "chosen people" attitude.

This is my answer:

* God is prepersonal, concepts of the Father will be conditioned by each person who experiences his presence. Religionist should strive for a unity among those who have the experience rather than a theological, doctrinal, dogmatic uniformity.

* The original religion of Jesus was generic, it was intended to be a revelatory meme to enhance all religions for all people over all the earth. Christianity became a religion about ----->Jesus, the Christian church became an institutional replacement for the original, radical, liberating religion of Jesus.

* When Jesus said "I am the way" he was stating a fact, because he has always been the way to the Father; anyone, anywhere, inside or outside of any religion, who seeks God will go through the spiritual gravity of the Son after we leave this world and proceed inward towards our Heavenly Father on Paradise.

This is true because the Paradise creator Sons are the Fathers of their respective creation. To seek God is to do so through the Son weather a person understands these things or not.

All sincere truth seekers received the spirit of truth poured out upon all flesh.

Perceptions of a God are indeed personal, I agree with that.