Last evening a man in our church had a major stoke. They got him to the hospital, ran a CAT scan and found a huge pool of blood and a lot of brain damage in his frontal cortex. The hospital here is a branch of the big one in Boise where they have a special stroke unit. They decided to fly him to Boise but the helicopter had a problem of some kind and they couldn't use it. They did a 2d CAT scan to re-assess the damage and decided it was bad enough that he really needed to get to Boise. So, they loaded him in an ambulance for the 2 hr drive. When they got to Boise, they ran yet another CAT scan. After the specialist looked at the results, he walked in the room about 3am this morning, pointed at the sky and said the man was the recipient of one of the Lord's miracles. There was no bleeding and no brain damage. It was gone.
There's always the question of why does God heal some and not others. I don't know. God will heal who he wants to heal. It's his world and he calls the shots. I was once healed myself of pneumonia about 25 years ago. I'd been very sick for over a week and was having breathing problems. My wife's aunt, who was a staunch Christian, prayed for me and it was gone. It felt like a huge belch starting at the bottom of my lungs and quickly pushing to the top. That took about 1.5 seconds I could breath freely again. It took a few days to cough the crud out of my lungs but the bug was gone.
Amen Grandson got a Life Flight to Denver last night. That's not a good thing. This morning the church prayed for him. During the service I got a text from my son. "At this moment you would not think anything was wrong. He's up playing and laughing." GOD IS GOOD Believe in HIM people.
Or, perhaps the specialist in Boise was in Boise, and not podunk Idaho for a reason?
This isn't podunk. The hospital here is a good one. They have a special unit in Boise for the really bad cases. A CAT that shows a big pool of blood is pretty hard to mistake.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
Sometimes, it isn't about who you'd think it was about. Remember, that our life here is just an infinitesimally small part of eternity. That child is probably in paradise.
We are incapable of knowing the larger picture no matter how smart some people think they are.
Here it is, for me. I hope I can express this. It just plain "rings" true. The Law, the Ten Commandants, all.
Those are rules to keep mankind from destroying itself.
if you have ever been sinned against, you know thot that feels. Sin separates' man from God. God became God on earth in the form of Jesus to show how to live. He died on a Cross to pay for all our sins. I doubt if there was another Way.
I hope, and pray the folks here, and everywhere take Him up on His Offer.
I'll back off, and hope some else is better at the explaining.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
Typical idiotic post from you. I seldom read anything from you that was actually worth the time and effort it took.
Here it is, for me. I hope I can express this. It just plain "rings" true. The Law, the Ten Commandants, all.
Those are rules to keep mankind from destroying itself.
if you have ever been sinned against, you know thot that feels. Sin separates' man from God. God became God on earth in the form of Jesus to show how to live. He died on a Cross to pay for all our sins. I doubt if there was another Way.
I hope, and pray the folks here, and everywhere take Him up on His Offer.
I'll back off, and hope some else is better at the explaining.
Amen... Wretched man that I am... But that His blood was shed for me.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
And why did God give this guy a stroke to begin with, if the plan was to make it go away?
Was he torturing this poor soul and his family in an effort to bring glory to himself?
You’d think someone that has been shot at “1/2 a million times” would’ve acknowledged that his family’s prayers for him were answered while he was in Vietnam.
Or what do I know? , maybe his whole family is like him.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
Typical idiotic post from you. I seldom read anything from you that was actually worth the time and effort it took.
You’d think someone that has been shot at “1/2 a million times” would’ve acknowledged that his family’s prayers for him were answered while he was in Vietnam.
Or what do I know? , maybe his whole family is like him.
58,000 dead, another 450,000 wounded....Did none of their families pray for them?
And that's just the Americans. That doesn't include our allies, and the 2 million to 7 million dead Vietnamese.
In hindsight I'm thankful he said "No" to some of my ridiculous requests. I just wish He'd share the plan with me from time to time so I wouldn't be so darn impatient with the process.
You’d think someone that has been shot at “1/2 a million times” would’ve acknowledged that his family’s prayers for him were answered while he was in Vietnam.
Or what do I know? , maybe his whole family is like him.
I will not try to speak for Rocky.
But one might think a survivor of military action would recognize their buddies had just as many folks at home praying for them, but they died none the less.
You gotta know, the enemy is praying just as hard as you are. And sometimes to the same god.
You’d think someone that has been shot at “1/2 a million times” would’ve acknowledged that his family’s prayers for him were answered while he was in Vietnam.
Or what do I know? , maybe his whole family is like him.
I will not try to speak for Rocky.
But one might think a survivor of military action would recognize their buddies had just as many folks at home praying for them, but they died none the less.
You gotta know, the enemy is praying just as hard as you are. And sometimes to the same god.
You’d think someone that has been shot at “1/2 a million times” would’ve acknowledged that his family’s prayers for him were answered while he was in Vietnam.
Or what do I know? , maybe his whole family is like him.
58,000 dead, another 450,000 wounded....Did none of their families pray for them?
And that's just the Americans. That doesn't include our allies, and the 2 million to 7 million dead Vietnamese.
I’m not one to question
But if his slow ass was buzzin around a in pack of gum with wings at less that 90 mph, someone was prayin for his ass.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
There is a book called A Case For Miracles. It was written by a scientist who documents a lot more than one or two. But of course some one like your self knows to protect your worldview you can not read such material.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
Typical idiotic post from you. I seldom read anything from you that was actually worth the time and effort it took.
That says a lot more about you than Rocky.
Don't worry, everything I posted about that jackwad applies to you as well.
You’d think someone that has been shot at “1/2 a million times” would’ve acknowledged that his family’s prayers for him were answered while he was in Vietnam.
Or what do I know? , maybe his whole family is like him.
58,000 dead, another 450,000 wounded....Did none of their families pray for them?
And that's just the Americans. That doesn't include our allies, and the 2 million to 7 million dead Vietnamese.
Your mistake is in believing fake news. HE said those who believe never die. You have no idea how many of our troops were saved by HIM who you say died.
That's why years ago, in a more Christian time, a person was said to have passed away or passed over. Saying a person died was part of the script to get young people to except that condition as finality. Now, live for today, for tomorrow you die, but not I.
Yes I do believe The Lord answers our prayers. Simple us are very challenged to understand when the answer is no. Bad things happen to good people as well ag good things happen to good people. All to frequently some of us focus on what we perceive as good things that happen to truly bad people this can be challenging at best.
Glad to hear things are going well for your fellow parishioner!
Abram begat Ismael. The Bible says Gods lineage came through the Lion of David. Islam disagrees.
The Bible repeatedly states Isaac was the only begotten son of Abraham. The name God gave Abram after laying HIS blessing on and changing him.
Satan has tried well to make the world believe Christian's are the brothers of Islam under Abraham. Mohammed said he had no brothers. But, at my age I cant off the top of my head remember all the Biblical truths.
They are like cancer, like the thief in the night, come to seek and destroy the WORD as God said they would, being minions of Satan, no less than subversives like Piglosi, Hillary, Zero, Nadless, Schiftless, the MSN, etc. Suckers are sure aligned against the Christian nation and aligning with our, ha, Islamic "brothers".
The hospital in Twin Falls is no podunc hospital. It’s state of the art. Having spent time in it I know. It has some very good doctors. Pretty asinine to say otherwise.
Rock I’m glad everything turned out the way it did.
I once witnessed a young womans leg grow about 1/2" in length. We were praying over her and it just grew out. She walked normally after that.
A teenage boy I know had dislexia. Severe case. His father and I walked through a series of prayers for forgivenes, rejection of generational sins, and healing. At the end of the hour the lad was reading perfectly with no difficulty what so ever. Same to this day.
I believe in God and been the lucky recipient of a miracle, but I don't share the attitude toward non believers as some of you. I've met Rocky a few times and I suspect he's a better guy than some believers I know. We are all on different points of a trajectory in faith and belief in God and believers would do well to not condemn those who are not there yet. Paul was once Saul.
I'd rather share a campfire with a decent non believer like Rocky before a sleazy believer. Wouldn't be surprised if God felt the same way.
All of ya come on up to Clarksville. Hang out in the mancave, got lotta room in it.
We can smoke a couple joints. Talk about God, Pros and Cons of both sides.
Roll on over to Cici,s for pizza. You guys will love the cinnamon rolls... And the custom made to order pizza so you dont have ta fill up on the buffet . I can teach ya how to fill out the form they have real quick
Then when you fuggs wanna hammer me about Cici,s on here.
Then I can hammer all of you guys on how you all put Jabba the Hut to shame and snuck out walmart bags full of cinnamon rolls for later on.
Sky 6 works in fugged up ways. Good and bad...... Man has wrote the bible in his own view over the ages about sky 6.
Muhammad was a human, and a pedophile, not to be confused with prophets who wrote the Holy Bible, based on God-breathed words.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NIV)
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
For the fools, in which there are many.....
Psalm 14 King James Version (KJV)
14 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Muhammad was a human, and a pedophile, not to be confused with prophets who wrote the Holy Bible, based on God-breathed words.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NIV)
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
For the fools, in which there are many.....
Psalm 14 King James Version (KJV)
14 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
I'm not convinced Muhammad existed. I see no good evidence he's more than a myth.
Here it is, for me. I hope I can express this. It just plain "rings" true. The Law, the Ten Commandants, all.
Those are rules to keep mankind from destroying itself.
if you have ever been sinned against, you know thot that feels. Sin separates' man from God. ObGod became God on earth in the form of Jesus to show how to live. He died on a Cross to pay for all our sins. I doubt if there was another Way.
I hope, and pray the folks here, and everywhere take Him up on His Offer.
I'll back off, and hope some else is better at the explaining.
You can't explain it. It's above us. I pray like most believers and hope he gives me a break in a pinch, but i don't bank on it. Ya ever hear that God works in mysterious ways? Also, remember this. If I'm wrong then no big deal. Someday the lights will go out and that will be the end. But if you ney sayers are wrong and I'm right? We're talking eternity here. You might want to rethink your thinking. Eternity's a long time to burn!
Why is it so difficult for nonbelievers to leave believers alone?
They will deny Him till the end. Then they’ll be REAL sorry.
Trying in vain to curry favor with the great destroyer.
Who are the one's trying to curry favor?
Think about it.
Well, your comment is thought provoking and that is ok.
So, I thought about....”curry favor”.....looked it up.... “To seek or gain favor by fawning or excessive and insincere praise.”
Wanna try that with an all knowing God? The God that knows the true nature and motivation of your heart?
That dog ain’t gonna hunt.
Thank you for demonstrating one of the arguments against Pascal's Wager.
Let's presume for a moment I was wrong. I'd rather stand before whom ever that god happened to be as an honest man and not one who pretended to believe, when of course, an all knowing being would know the dishonesty and con I was attempting to run in a bid to get into his/her version of paradise.
eternal torment in the lake of fire is specifically for the Devil, beast and false profit... It does not Apply to regular sinners.... Which will be consumed And turned to ash and be no more.
Here it is, for me. I hope I can express this. It just plain "rings" true. The Law, the Ten Commandants, all.
Those are rules to keep mankind from destroying itself.
if you have ever been sinned against, you know thot that feels. Sin separates' man from God. ObGod became God on earth in the form of Jesus to show how to live. He died on a Cross to pay for all our sins. I doubt if there was another Way.
I hope, and pray the folks here, and everywhere take Him up on His Offer.
I'll back off, and hope some else is better at the explaining.
You can't explain it. It's above us. I pray like most believers and hope he gives me a break in a pinch, but i don't bank on it. Ya ever hear that God works in mysterious ways? Also, remember this. If I'm wrong then no big deal. Someday the lights will go out and that will be the end. But if you ney sayers are wrong and I'm right? We're talking eternity here. You might want to rethink your thinking. Eternity's a long time to burn!
Even if there is a god, who says you got the right one? How many versions of Christianity think they are the only "True Christians" and all others are going to hell? What about all the non-Christian god?
And to claim that if you are wrong it's "no big deal", really? How much have you given to the church? How much of your time? How many days in Church when you could of been hunting? These are real costs you an paying in this life, the only one you know for sure you will experience.
So, there are real costs to believing, and even if there is a supernatural being behind all this, your odds are not 50/50.
Why is it so difficult for nonbelievers to leave believers alone?
They will deny Him till the end. Then they’ll be REAL sorry.
Trying in vain to curry favor with the great destroyer.
Who are the one's trying to curry favor?
Think about it.
Well, your comment is thought provoking and that is ok.
So, I thought about....”curry favor”.....looked it up.... “To seek or gain favor by fawning or excessive and insincere praise.”
Wanna try that with an all knowing God? The God that knows the true nature and motivation of your heart?
That dog ain’t gonna hunt.
Thank you for demonstrating one of the arguments against Pascal's Wager.
Let's presume for a moment I was wrong. I'd rather stand before whom ever that god happened to be as an honest man and not one who pretended to believe, when of course, an all knowing being would know the dishonesty and con I was attempting to run in a bid to get into his/her version of paradise.
Does believing mean currying favor. Ha. Do you believe the sun will come up in the morning. So, what favor are you currying?
It's way over my old head. I wish I was much better at explaining "IT", it's called Faith for a reason. When you are saved by faith, it starts right away.
Why is it so difficult for nonbelievers to leave believers alone?
They will deny Him till the end. Then they’ll be REAL sorry.
Trying in vain to curry favor with the great destroyer.
Who are the one's trying to curry favor?
Think about it.
Well, your comment is thought provoking and that is ok.
So, I thought about....”curry favor”.....looked it up.... “To seek or gain favor by fawning or excessive and insincere praise.”
Wanna try that with an all knowing God? The God that knows the true nature and motivation of your heart?
That dog ain’t gonna hunt.
Thank you for demonstrating one of the arguments against Pascal's Wager.
Let's presume for a moment I was wrong. I'd rather stand before whom ever that god happened to be as an honest man and not one who pretended to believe, when of course, an all knowing being would know the dishonesty and con I was attempting to run in a bid to get into his/her version of paradise.
Yep, Pascal’s Wager is bogus from the word go. It assumes that the “choice” is made by a man without input or influence from God. Totally unbiblical. You will not find me defending the theology inherent in Pascal’s Wager.
The error or perhaps “risk” you may not be aware of is that God may “play the videotape” and show you dozens or perhaps hundreds of times that the one .... “you” in your statement above...the one standing before God did indeed reject the Son and the Gift. “Honest” rejection and defiance of God at the last will not work out well.
But, like someone said....” a man has to do what he thinks is best.”
Faith is just that! It’s Faith!!! You either believe or you don’t. It’s that simple. Some people say you can’t prove God exist. I always say you can’t prove he doesn’t. It’s up to the individual to believe or not to believe.
Faith is just that! It’s Faith!!! You either believe or you don’t. It’s that simple. Some people say you can’t prove God exist. I always say you can’t prove he doesn’t. It’s up to the individual to believe or not to believe.
Just my 2 cents.
Yep, ones own self gets to choose, unlike dogs and deer.
I know that God answers prayers. My wife and my children know that God answers our prayers. My brothers and sisters know that God answers our prayers. My best friends know that God answers our prayers.
My wife and I were just talking about this very thing a couple days ago as were my brother and I. We all concluded that as we grow older the clarity of God’s hand in our lives becomes unmistakable. The number of times that our prayers were answered and our lives or the lives of our dearest loved ones were led out of the darkness become more than mere coincidences. My wife and I felt sorry for those that believe that God’s hand in our lives and the blessings he’s bestowed upon us are simply coincidental, for that would be a lonely existence.
There was feuding and tension and conflict among the very called who were ‘with’ Jesus...and in the early church. People are different, and they see things differently. They feel differently and have different perspectives about things. Whether it’s politics or theology or marriage or raising kids or finances, etc.... Jesus didn't call everyone to agree on everything, but He did command his followers to be united by unconditional love.
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
15 And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.
16 Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;
17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.
18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
I know GOD answers prayers, otherwise how would Trump have been elected.
Some needs He answers without the prayer even having been asked.
JFC, what a moron. Did God get Barack Obama elected too? How about the Abraham Lincoln you so detest (because he isn't racist enough for you). God put him in office too??
Well... heaven must be pretty rural. Only 31% of humans are Christians. Plenty of room for you boys to shoot.
However, I got bad news for you bigots, 79% of of African Americans are Christians...
Maybe you should pick Taoism.... doesnt sound like heaven is where you mouthy boys wanna be, maybe a little darker than you had hoped hahaha
The state of the black church in USA is by and large apostate, marxist-syncretism.
What about the white churches that are allowing homosexuals and even marrying them? What about catholics with young boys peckers in their hands.... what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions? Theres lots more but I will spare you the reading, just so you can feel good about your previous comment lol
Well... heaven must be pretty rural. Only 31% of humans are Christians. Plenty of room for you boys to shoot.
However, I got bad news for you bigots, 79% of of African Americans are Christians...
Maybe you should pick Taoism.... doesnt sound like heaven is where you mouthy boys wanna be, maybe a little darker than you had hoped hahaha
The state of the black church in USA is by and large apostate, marxist-syncretism.
What about the white churches that are allowing homosexuals and even marrying them? What about catholics with young boys peckers in their hands.... what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions? Theres lots more but I will spare you the reading, just so you can feel good about your previous comment lol
You don't have to splain to me... I'm agin all that
1 Timothy 4 King James Version (KJV) 4 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
Well, your comment is thought provoking and that is ok.
So, I thought about....”curry favor”.....looked it up.... “To seek or gain favor by fawning or excessive and insincere praise.”
Wanna try that with an all knowing God? The God that knows the true nature and motivation of your heart?
That dog ain’t gonna hunt.
No, but one certainly might fool the other Christians about.
I just might have spent a few hundred hours in Sabbath School thinking much more about the girls on each side of me, than about any God. But I certainly knew the answers to any questions put forth.
What about the white churches that are allowing homosexuals...
Do these churches also allow liars, adulterers, cheaters, the greedy, the covetous, the lustful, the porn-watchin’, the tax-dodgin’, the racist, the jealous, the judgmental, the angry, the drunkards, those who eat too much and spend too much and medicate too much and smoke too much and worry too much...who gather together because they believe Jesus is the light of the world and they need more light...?
Sure miracles happen. Right off it's a miracle that the universe has the properties that allows life (of any kind) to develop - go check the odds with physicists. The way I look at it, somewhat facetiously, is that God doesn't work for me, I work for him, He owes me nothing. And there's a commandment that says to not covet what the other guy gets.
If you destroyed all religious books, as well as all science books..
Came back in 2000yrs, only the new science books would read the same.
Why is the christian god better than jade emperor, or the umpteen hundred hindu gods? Why are there so many gods...
Why is christianity, being a much younger religion, right over far eastern religions.. that differ entirely?
Whether its strictly true or not, it remains absolutely true that Judeo-Christianity is the foundation stone of Western Civilization.
I agree... those god fearing christians came here to escape oppression, and killed off and conquered the indians...
What losers those damn indians, if they would have only prayed with us....
Conquest is the story of human history so don't go all moralistic on us over the very primitive American Indians and Christianity. Besides, it was susceptibility to disease that was the primary proximate cause of the demise of the American Indian.
Sure miracles happen. Right off it's a miracle that the universe has the properties that allows life (of any kind) to develop - go check the odds with physicists. The way I look at it, somewhat facetiously, is that God doesn't work for me, I work for him, He owes me nothing. And there's a commandment that says to not covet what the other guy gets.
Yes, the existence of the Universe, fine-tuned for human existence as it is, certainly seems to be powerful evidence for the existence of a Supreme Being.
If you destroyed all religious books, as well as all science books..
Came back in 2000yrs, only the new science books would read the same.
Why is the christian god better than jade emperor, or the umpteen hundred hindu gods? Why are there so many gods...
Why is christianity, being a much younger religion, right over far eastern religions.. that differ entirely?
Whether its strictly true or not, it remains absolutely true that Judeo-Christianity is the foundation stone of Western Civilization.
I agree... those god fearing christians came here to escape oppression, and killed off and conquered the indians...
What losers those damn indians, if they would have only prayed with us....
And yes the Indians were "losers", at least if we define that term with reference to reproductive success. They were certainly a very backward, benighted civilization.
I bet there ain't a living soul out there that waited on God to pull the ripcord.
why did believers bother rushing the church goer stroke victim to hospital
All they had to do was invest their faith and start praying and let God do the rest.
The amount of times christians put their primary trust in the science of Glocks and trained Paramedics over Their God and feeble prayers tells you how much they really believe in what they are trying to sell you.
Its a wild ass desperate craspshoot chance that ones prayers would line up with their Gods predetermined will. And when it does they claim that prayers worked.
It's way over my old head. I wish I was much better at explaining "IT", it's called Faith for a reason. When you are saved by faith, it starts right away.
After all this wrangling and arguing, one of my favorite verses comes to mind.:
12And by these, my son, be further warned: There is no end to the making of many books, and much study wearies the body. 13When all has been heard, the conclusion of the matter is this: Fear God and keep His commandments, because this is the whole duty of man. 14For God will bring every deed into judgment, along with every hidden thing, whether good or evil.
So argue, shout, scream, ask all your questions, make all your denials, and say there is no evidence and so you don't believe. Ok. You have the right to do as you choose. But do yourself an eternal favor. Stop asking men to convince you. Find a spot where you are alone, look up to the heavens, and ask "If there is a God and if you really exist...just show yourself to me in a way I can see and believe". If you really mean it and you really want to know then He will answer. Besides, you know the truth already. You just deny it.
Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
What's vindictive about going to paradise?
You are presuming "paradise" exists. I have yet to see good evidence for that.
Sheesh! Really? You still haven't figured this out?
Quote
On a deeper level, you are proclaiming God did that kid a favor by killing it. If that is the case, why haven't Christians closed all their hospitals?
Because only God knows when it's our time to go. And He did command us to heal the sick.
There are very few things in life that are as obvious as the fact that more time here is generally a good thing. We can look at crime stats and see that people generally become more virtuous as they age.
There was feuding and tension and conflict among the very called who were ‘with’ Jesus...and in the early church. People are different, and they see things differently. They feel differently and have different perspectives about things. Whether it’s politics or theology or marriage or raising kids or finances, etc.... Jesus didn't call everyone to agree on everything, but He did command his followers to be united by unconditional love.
2 Peter 3:17-18 exhorts us, "You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard lest, being carried away by the error of unprincipled men, you fall from your own steadfastness, but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen."
1 Corinthians 1:10 teaches, Now I exhort you, brothers, by he name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree, an there be no division among you but you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment."
"Only conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the Gospel of Christ; so that whether I come and see you or remain absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one soul striving together for the faith of the Gospel." (Philippians 1:27)
A few verses later God continues the thought,
"If therefore there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose." (Philippians 2:1-2)
Now may the God of perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to Christ Jesus; that with one accord you may with one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." (Romans 15:5-6)
Well... heaven must be pretty rural. Only 31% of humans are Christians. Plenty of room for you boys to shoot.
However, I got bad news for you bigots, 79% of of African Americans are Christians...
Maybe you should pick Taoism.... doesnt sound like heaven is where you mouthy boys wanna be, maybe a little darker than you had hoped hahaha
The state of the black church in USA is by and large apostate, marxist-syncretism.
What about the white churches that are allowing homosexuals and even marrying them? What about catholics with young boys peckers in their hands.... what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions? Theres lots more but I will spare you the reading, just so you can feel good about your previous comment lol
Jesus covered that:
Mat 7:21 ¶ "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
After all this wrangling and arguing, one of my favorite verses comes to mind.:
12And by these, my son, be further warned: There is no end to the making of many books, and much study wearies the body. 13When all has been heard, the conclusion of the matter is this: Fear God and keep His commandments, because this is the whole duty of man. 14For God will bring every deed into judgment, along with every hidden thing, whether good or evil.
So argue, shout, scream, ask all your questions, make all your denials, and say there is no evidence and so you don't believe. Ok. You have the right to do as you choose. But do yourself an eternal favor. Stop asking men to convince you. Find a spot where you are alone, look up to the heavens, and ask "If there is a God and if you really exist...just show yourself to me in a way I can see and believe". If you really mean it and you really want to know then He will answer. Besides, you know the truth already. You just deny it.
Generally speaking, when you say look up at the heavens... is that in the direction of the moon? Do I look down at lunch time then or directly at the sun?
Well... heaven must be pretty rural. Only 31% of humans are Christians. Plenty of room for you boys to shoot.
However, I got bad news for you bigots, 79% of of African Americans are Christians...
Maybe you should pick Taoism.... doesnt sound like heaven is where you mouthy boys wanna be, maybe a little darker than you had hoped hahaha
The state of the black church in USA is by and large apostate, marxist-syncretism.
What about the white churches that are allowing homosexuals and even marrying them? What about catholics with young boys peckers in their hands.... what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions? Theres lots more but I will spare you the reading, just so you can feel good about your previous comment lol
Jesus covered that:
Mat 7:21 ¶ "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
So is it only the homosexuals who wont get in, or the people who sat in the pew next to them? Its all very confusing lol
The state of the black church in USA is by and large apostate, marxist-syncretism.
What about the white churches that are allowing homosexuals and even marrying them? What about catholics with young boys peckers in their hands.... what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions? Theres lots more but I will spare you the reading, just so you can feel good about your previous comment lol
Jesus covered that:
Mat 7:21 ¶ "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
I prefer the translations that have "you evildoers" translated along the lines of "workers of lawlessness". Why? Because it emphasizes that The Law has not passed away and it makes identifying who these people are much easier.
I've been witness to enough miracles of the "hit-you-over-the head" variety, that I cannot believe other than that God does answer prayer.
One thing all this has taught me: When one is not feeling God's presence in the World, it is because of personal blindness, perversity, or ignorance. It's not that God is failing to reveal himself. He's there. You're just not open to it.
I am not at all certain about the mechanics of prayer. I have no clue. I have seen prayer work. I have seen prayer not work. However, I have seen prayer work in such bizarre, unexplainable ways that I do not and cannot deny its power. There is stuff going on there of Cosmic complexity, that I'm not even going to venture a guess. Given that, I will give the following advice:
Pray. It may feel silly at first, but it is well worth the effort.
Give thanks. Talk to the air and just thank whatever might be listening for the good day you've had, or that feeling you get when you crawl between the sheets at night. Remember to say thank you for every piss you take. Consider the alternatives and you will, believe me.
Talking to the air helps. I've been talking to God longer than I've been a Christian. Forget the mechanics or that it doesn't make sense. You talk. Something listens.
This isn't Santa Claus. You don't want to get hooked on writing your daily Christmas list. It ain't gonna work.
Do not look for proof. Proof will come, but do not ask for it and do not expect it. There are a bunch of reasons for this. The biggest reason is that clear and certain proof is not something anybody wants. Most people who get that kind of proof don't continue breathing. Been there. Done that. I've got the broken coffee mug and the ripped T-shirt.
Most people get hung up trying to address the Big Hairy Guy in the Sky. I don't know if he's there or not. What I do know is stop thinking about looking at the big Mountain far off in the distance or the clouds above and wondering how to get the Guy up there to listen. Instead, contemplate the idea that you are in the middle of the Mountain, and what you are trying to reach is all around. If that idea doesn't blow your skirts up, go for a walk in the woods. God is all around you. God is within you. There is no place you can go where God does not Exist, except in your own heart.
This latter concept is an illusion. God is there, you just don't want to recognize it.
Remember, the role of shaman was not something I signed up for. It showed up on my doorstep. I got pushed into it. It came as an overwhelming wave of coincidences that I ended up having to recognize. When I've tried to walk away from it, strange things have happened.
Last evening a man in our church had a major stoke. They got him to the hospital, ran a CAT scan and found a huge pool of blood and a lot of brain damage in his frontal cortex. The hospital here is a branch of the big one in Boise where they have a special stroke unit. They decided to fly him to Boise but the helicopter had a problem of some kind and they couldn't use it. They did a 2d CAT scan to re-assess the damage and decided it was bad enough that he really needed to get to Boise. So, they loaded him in an ambulance for the 2 hr drive. When they got to Boise, they ran yet another CAT scan. After the specialist looked at the results, he walked in the room about 3am this morning, pointed at the sky and said the man was the recipient of one of the Lord's miracles. There was no bleeding and no brain damage. It was gone.
There's always the question of why does God heal some and not others. I don't know. God will heal who he wants to heal. It's his world and he calls the shots. I was once healed myself of pneumonia about 25 years ago. I'd been very sick for over a week and was having breathing problems. My wife's aunt, who was a staunch Christian, prayed for me and it was gone. It felt like a huge belch starting at the bottom of my lungs and quickly pushing to the top. That took about 1.5 seconds I could breath freely again. It took a few days to cough the crud out of my lungs but the bug was gone.
I absolutely believe God answers prayers. But, he does not always give us the answer we want. God is God and I am not.
what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions?
I ran across something very interesting on this. The big question is, are they teaching the truth? Are they giving an accurate message about salvation through faith? Don't worry about all the rest - just consider if people who listen to them are on a straight path to faith and salvation.
Phil 1:15 It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. 16 The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. 17 The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. 18 But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice. Yes, and I will continue to rejoice,
Paul says that if they're preaching an accurate message of salvation, don't worry about the rest. The object is to get them saved. Once they're in heaven, the Lord will straighten them out on any false teaching they've heard. Don't worry about all the money they're making as long as their message is true. Just concentrate on whether they spread the true word of salvation.
I admit that I have a hard time with this. I see some of them like Joyce Meyer and others preaching their own invented version of the Bible and I grind my teeth. But, their basic message of faith is true and Paul says to not worry about it. Meyer has come up with some nonsense about Jesus having to burn in hell and she brags about all the money she's made but her followers are being saved and that's the important part. Let God deal with the other stuff.
The day you can show me a person who lost a limb grew it back is the day I will believe in medical miracles. Until then it’s just luck and or misdiagnosis.
what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions?
I ran across something very interesting on this. The big question is, are they teaching the truth? Are they giving an accurate message about salvation through faith? Don't worry about all the rest - just consider if people who listen to them are on a straight path to faith and salvation.
Phil 1:15 It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. 16 The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. 17 The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. 18 But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice. Yes, and I will continue to rejoice,
Paul says that if they're preaching an accurate message of salvation, don't worry about the rest. The object is to get them saved. Once they're in heaven, the Lord will straighten them out on any false teaching they've heard. Don't worry about all the money they're making as long as their message is true. Just concentrate on whether they spread the true word of salvation.
I admit that I have a hard time with this. I see some of them like Joyce Meyer and others preaching their own invented version of the Bible and I grind my teeth. But, their basic message of faith is true and Paul says to not worry about it. Meyer has come up with some nonsense about Jesus having to burn in hell and she brags about all the money she's made but her followers are being saved and that's the important part. Let God deal with the other stuff.
Hahahahaha invented version of the bible hahahahahahaha
Meyer has come up with some nonsense about Jesus having to burn in hell and she brags about all the money she's made but her followers are being saved...
How did you confirm or verify her followers have actually been saved?
Eph 2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no-one can boast.
She teaches this. Anyone who follows it by having faith in Christs will be saved regardless of other non-scriptural stuff she says.
How come the Christians were so lazy and just used “god”... all the other religions, for the most part utilize or understand the meaning of the word god, but their gods have names..
I beat your god gets picked on in the heavens by the other named gods...
Zues is probably up there slapping “god” around being he’s the king of gods. “God, the nameless one, let me get this straight... you got a chick pregnant without getting any? You need to go on the Maury Povich show”..
The day you can show me a person who lost a limb grew it back is the day I will believe in medical miracles. Until then it’s just luck and or misdiagnosis.
You are exaggerating your information base. A scientist is extensively quoted in the book The Case For Miracles. There are lots of documented before and after tests. It comes in an audio version.
Praying to Santa has the same statistical outcomes as praying to god, just saying...
Santa's granted a lot of my wishes, but there was always human help involved, much like praying for a positive medical outcome.
Where do you suppose the ability of humans to provide medical treatment comes from? Deer can't do that.
It was flooding and the old lady home alone just knew Jesus would save her. Water was up to the porch when a high wheeled vehicle came by and offered to take her to safety. She said, "No, Jesus will save me" and prayed all the harder. The water rose to the second floor when a boat came by. Same thing , she refused, hugged her bible, and prayed all the harder. As the water rose she found her way to the roof when a helicopter came by. Again she refused saying, "Jesus will save me!" So she drowned, went to heaven, and met Jesus. She asked, "I prayed and prayed and prayed, why didn't you save me? Jesus said, "Lady, I sent a truck, a boat and a helicopter. What more did you want?"
Old joke but no little truth in it. Keep your eyes open.
.... Where do you suppose the ability of humans to provide medical treatment comes from? Deer can't do that.
....
Yeah but deer are stupid.
Being able to understand and invent medicine, science etc doesn't mean it has come from a god, but it's able to claim so easily without any justification.
No more to it than that? Like a great ape? Or maybe a dolphin sans thumbs. If you're really going to a Jesuit university you must have read Aristotle, Guess he was just woofin' the Sophists.
Being able to understand and invent medicine, science etc doesn't mean it has come from a god, but it's able to claim so easily without any justification.
Where does the aspiration to do such things come from? No other creature on this earth acts altruistically. Doctors Without Borders leaps to mind (for some unfathomable reason) and they aren't in it for the bucks.
Anyway, though it's a priori to the question this is straying off topic.
Being able to understand and invent medicine, science etc doesn't mean it has come from a god, but it's able to claim so easily without any justification.
Where does the aspiration to do such things come from? No other creature on this earth acts altruistically. Doctors Without Borders leaps to mind (for some unfathomable reason) and they aren't in it for the bucks.
Hey, muzzies and unchristian dimocraps are doing all they can to cure aids.
Read The Case For Miracles. It proves this statement false.
Lee Strobel, really??
Strobel tells about an african village that desperately needed a waterbottle to save a newborn,
They had damaged the only one they had, so they got together to pray for a new bottle that they needed that night to save the infant...
Couple hrs later a jeep turns up with a large parcel, Inside was the much needed water bottle... But the Box was full of other stuff they didnt ask God for in prayer.
Turns out the packet was posted from Ireland some 5 months previously.
Conclusion:
The irish catholics employ seamail to save on freight costs.
Final note:
Nobody thought to pray for God to repair the water bottle they already had.
Being able to understand and invent medicine, science etc doesn't mean it has come from a god, but it's able to claim so easily without any justification.
Where does the aspiration to do such things come from? No other creature on this earth acts altruistically. Doctors Without Borders leaps to mind (for some unfathomable reason) and they aren't in it for the bucks.
Anyway, though it's a priori to the question this is straying off topic.
Aspiration to do the right thing is still not evidence of a god.
Well... heaven must be pretty rural. Only 31% of humans are Christians. Plenty of room for you boys to shoot.
However, I got bad news for you bigots, 79% of of African Americans are Christians...
Maybe you should pick Taoism.... doesnt sound like heaven is where you mouthy boys wanna be, maybe a little darker than you had hoped hahaha
The state of the black church in USA is by and large apostate, marxist-syncretism.
What about the white churches that are allowing homosexuals and even marrying them? What about catholics with young boys peckers in their hands.... what about these mega churches with televised services with pastors making millions? Theres lots more but I will spare you the reading, just so you can feel good about your previous comment lol
Jesus covered that:
Mat 7:21 ¶ "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
So is it only the homosexuals who wont get in, or the people who sat in the pew next to them? Its all very confusing lol
You're easily confused. Terrorists bad, terrorist killers good. Hang in there. You'll get it after a while, or not.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
Hey Rocky,
Regards to you and yours. And best wishes to all on this thread.
Consider whether this life is so good that we wish to live in our present bodies and existence forever? Many consider mortality to be a gift.
Yes there are lots of cases - dolphins defending seals against sharks, as another
Altruism is a man made label for a behaviour that exists in nature, as some sort of handy feature resulting from the evolution process, who knows.
Distinguish from instinctive acts. Go back to ancient Greeks who attempted to explain man's desire for perfect truth, perfect love, perfect justice, perfect beauty, perfect being. These concepts are not available to animals much less the desire to obtain them. Therefore man's ability to desire these virtues seems to come from somewhere other than nature, to transcend nature.
The efficacy of prayer, if effective, should show up in the statistics...it's easy to dismiss a failure of prayer as weak faith.
Again: The Case For Miracles. Check it out.
There is also case against miracles. The strongest part being that there is not a single case of a proven miracle to hold up. Spontaneous remission is not an example of a miracle. A remission can happen regardless of religion or prayer, as can a return of the disease.
But be careful what you ask for. It's gotten to the point where I have a devil of a time making sticky rice. (Only makes sense if you watched the SNL clip)
[quote=victoro]"There's always the question of why does God heal some and not others"
The real question is why did God make him have the stroke in the first place???
Yep, more than one set of 'free will' - the desire to pig out and the desire to stop eating in a constant battle where one desire triumphs over the other leaving a trail of self loathing and low self esteem.....that's free will for ya.
The strongest part being that there is not a single case of a proven miracle to hold up.
Quote
...
“When James was born the midwife scooped him up and put him in my hands. But I noticed that his legs and arms dangled down. He wasn’t moving. He wasn’t breathing. He wasn’t crying, he was kind of a blue colour. So I held him for a second and then my midwife took him and she began CPR.”
It was at this point that Bonnie fell into a state shock. Her friend, who was present at the birth, called an ambulance and her husband calmly performed an emergency baptism. At the moment that Travis traced water on his son¹s forehead and baptised him James Fulton, Bonnie’s friend began to pray for the intercession of the newborn¹s namesake.
...
By the time the paramedics arrived there was still no pulse. Bonnie spent the 20-minute journey to the hospital in a separate ambulance from her husband and baby, lying alone, unaware if her son was dead or alive.
...
Five men eventually emerged with tears in their eyes. “They said to him: ‘Your son is alive’ and Travis understood in that moment that what they were really saying was: ‘He’s alive now but just for right now.’ The fact that they were crying meant that he knew that things were really bad
The miraculous breath had come after 61 excruciating minutes. James had breathed again at the moment doctors gave up their efforts and stopped to record his time of death. ...
Bonnie starts to explain to me the full extent of the miracle. “The way my doctor explained it to me was: ‘It’s amazing that James came back to life and it¹s a miracle that he is doing as well as he is.¹ Because he should have had massive organ failure and then they expected him to be very severely disabled. Then they thought that he would have very severe cerebral palsy. They thought that he would have to be strapped to a wheelchair for the rest of his life, have a feeding tube and probably be blind. They thought that mentally he would not be aware of anything. It was supposed to be pretty grim and that was if he even lived.”
Bonnie was able to bring her baby home after seven weeks in hospital. “As he continued I think they gave us an increasingly better prognosis. So it went from very severely disabled to: ‘OK, so he’s going to have cerebral palsy. We just don¹t know what it will look like.’ But he continued to get better and seemed more and more like a normal baby… I mean, there was always some big question marks for about the first six to 12 months just because he was a baby, so we had to wait for him to hit his milestones to know how complete the miracle was.
“But my husband, and I and family and friends, were all at home interacting with James when he was two and a half months old, when he was five months old, and were sitting there thinking: ‘This kid is normal. He’s like any of our other babies we¹ve seen at this age. This really is a miracle.'”
Well documented, happened in 2010 involving a modern medical facility. Explain that one.
Copied from Catholic Herald but if you Google "sheen miracle" you'll get a buttload of references.
The strongest part being that there is not a single case of a proven miracle to hold up.
Quote
...
“When James was born the midwife scooped him up and put him in my hands. But I noticed that his legs and arms dangled down. He wasn’t moving. He wasn’t breathing. He wasn’t crying, he was kind of a blue colour. So I held him for a second and then my midwife took him and she began CPR.”
It was at this point that Bonnie fell into a state shock. Her friend, who was present at the birth, called an ambulance and her husband calmly performed an emergency baptism. At the moment that Travis traced water on his son¹s forehead and baptised him James Fulton, Bonnie’s friend began to pray for the intercession of the newborn¹s namesake.
...
By the time the paramedics arrived there was still no pulse. Bonnie spent the 20-minute journey to the hospital in a separate ambulance from her husband and baby, lying alone, unaware if her son was dead or alive.
...
Five men eventually emerged with tears in their eyes. “They said to him: ‘Your son is alive’ and Travis understood in that moment that what they were really saying was: ‘He’s alive now but just for right now.’ The fact that they were crying meant that he knew that things were really bad
The miraculous breath had come after 61 excruciating minutes. James had breathed again at the moment doctors gave up their efforts and stopped to record his time of death. ...
Bonnie starts to explain to me the full extent of the miracle. “The way my doctor explained it to me was: ‘It’s amazing that James came back to life and it¹s a miracle that he is doing as well as he is.¹ Because he should have had massive organ failure and then they expected him to be very severely disabled. Then they thought that he would have very severe cerebral palsy. They thought that he would have to be strapped to a wheelchair for the rest of his life, have a feeding tube and probably be blind. They thought that mentally he would not be aware of anything. It was supposed to be pretty grim and that was if he even lived.”
Bonnie was able to bring her baby home after seven weeks in hospital. “As he continued I think they gave us an increasingly better prognosis. So it went from very severely disabled to: ‘OK, so he’s going to have cerebral palsy. We just don¹t know what it will look like.’ But he continued to get better and seemed more and more like a normal baby… I mean, there was always some big question marks for about the first six to 12 months just because he was a baby, so we had to wait for him to hit his milestones to know how complete the miracle was.
“But my husband, and I and family and friends, were all at home interacting with James when he was two and a half months old, when he was five months old, and were sitting there thinking: ‘This kid is normal. He’s like any of our other babies we¹ve seen at this age. This really is a miracle.'”
Well documented, happened in 2010 involving a modern medical facility. Explain that one.
Copied from Catholic Herald but if you Google "sheen miracle" you'll get a buttload of references.
Hmmm,
When I search the medical journals, I don't find any results.
. Copied from Catholic Herald but if you Google "sheen miracle" you'll get a buttload of references.
So it required the Pope to give it a seal of approval as a miracle, so he could move forward with giving Archbishop Sheen a 'beatification'.
For those who dont know what that is... Its where the Vatican confirms someone has gained entry to heaven.... so catholics can pray to them to intercede with God on ones behalf.
The vatican preempting the decision of God concerning ones ultimate fate.
Yes there are lots of cases - dolphins defending seals against sharks, as another
Altruism is a man made label for a behaviour that exists in nature, as some sort of handy feature resulting from the evolution process, who knows.
Distinguish from instinctive acts. Go back to ancient Greeks who attempted to explain man's desire for perfect truth, perfect love, perfect justice, perfect beauty, perfect being. These concepts are not available to animals much less the desire to obtain them. Therefore man's ability to desire these virtues seems to come from somewhere other than nature, to transcend nature.
Not at all. It's an entirely natural phenomenon resulting from evolution.
Evolution acts on populations, not individuals. Populations that work together, take care of each other, and display the trait you label "altruism" are more likely to survive than those who don't.
Heck, we even see these traits in rats. If you have two rats of unequal size and you pair them against each other in successive wrestling matches, the larger rat will let the small one win about 1/3 of the time, so the small one will be willing to continue the cycle of play. See it's so simple even a rat can do it.
It's because there's nobody listening, Wabi. Or as I said above, god is a cruel bastid.
I pray you will repent so that you will never know just how cruel (just) He can be. Let's say I am wrong. No big deal. I die and cease to exist. Lets say you are wrong. You die and live in eternal misery and agony.
Heck, we even see these traits in rats. If you have two rats of unequal size and you pair them against each other in successive wrestling matches, the larger rat will let the small one win about 1/3 of the time, so the small one will be willing to continue the cycle of play. See it's so simple even a rat can do it.
So the bigger rat (instinctively) acts to give himself a preponderance of satisfying consequences, namely more play dominating the smaller rat. Those endorphins from conquest are addictive. Thought you took Ethics. I'm not going to re-argue Plato - been way too long since I read Plato - but why should we seek, say, perfect justice when instinctively we, individually, are better off cheating?
It's because there's nobody listening, Wabi. Or as I said above, god is a cruel bastid.
I pray you will repent so that you will never know just how cruel (just) He can be. Let's say I am wrong. No big deal. I die and cease to exist. Lets say you are wrong. You die and live in eternal misery and agony.
Heck, we even see these traits in rats. If you have two rats of unequal size and you pair them against each other in successive wrestling matches, the larger rat will let the small one win about 1/3 of the time, so the small one will be willing to continue the cycle of play. See it's so simple even a rat can do it.
So the bigger rat (instinctively) acts to give himself a preponderance of satisfying consequences, namely more play dominating the smaller rat. Those endorphins from conquest are addictive. Thought you took Ethics. I'm not going to re-argue Plato - been way too long since I read Plato - but why should we seek, say, perfect justice when instinctively we, individually, are better off cheating?
Because we are not better off cheating.
The single most damaging thing to an economy is corruption.
You need to do a better job examining your presuppositions.
I know God answers prayers. He is still doing miracles also. I’ve seen both in my son and father’s surgeries. To God be the glory!
How many surgeons? How many combined years of medical training and experience? How many dollars worth of equipment at their disposal?
During my sons very technical lens replacement surgery (@ 11 months old) the Doctor came to tell us after 3-4 hrs and multiple attempts it just wasn’t going to happen. We had a very committed prayer with the doctor, my family and my pastor. The doctor went back in for to try once more. The doctor said the lens slid in like Cinderella’s slipper. My son is now 19yrs old and enjoying near 20/20 eyesight. The doctor still refers to him as the miracle patient.
After my father’s first heart valve replacement surgery the doctors detected infection a couple of days later. His incision was oozing and opening back up. That was on a Wednesday. That evening our church members had a special prayer for his recovery. Around 2am my father sat up in the bed from his sleep. He did not know what woke him. Thursday morning before taking him back for surgery the doctors noticed the infection was gone and there was no need for surgery. He made a full recovery.
Call it what you want. I know it was the Lord placing his healing hand on my family. Prayer works and it’s amazing how many don’t believe in God until they need him.
The single most damaging thing to an economy is corruption.
You need to do a better job examining your presuppositions.
I said individually better off, f--- society.. For example lots of stuff I could have stolen from work with zero chance of getting caught. One job I had relatively free access to accounting records. Fake a few contracts with one conspirator and we'd both get rich. Because I had trusted access a little presto changeo on the computer and we'd both get rich. The books were so screwed up (government) nobody would ever notice.
Ej, if you could have been smart enough to become a teacher for retards, you could have dealt with folks on your level.
Like most christians, your not very christian... or maybe that makes you pretty christian.
Its very confusing to see a man of science, also talk about HE.. but then call someone a retard. The very nature that a doctors brain would be contempt with the belief in religion makes you the retard.
re·tard verb /riˈtärd/ delay or hold back in terms of progress, development, or accomplishment.
Keep praying for that lung to come back... im sure he’ll answer your prayers and you’ll be a spring chicken in no time!
Now go back to your christian ways of spewing your hate grumps...
The strongest part being that there is not a single case of a proven miracle to hold up.
Quote
...
“When James was born the midwife scooped him up and put him in my hands. But I noticed that his legs and arms dangled down. He wasn’t moving. He wasn’t breathing. He wasn’t crying, he was kind of a blue colour. So I held him for a second and then my midwife took him and she began CPR.”
It was at this point that Bonnie fell into a state shock. Her friend, who was present at the birth, called an ambulance and her husband calmly performed an emergency baptism. At the moment that Travis traced water on his son¹s forehead and baptised him James Fulton, Bonnie’s friend began to pray for the intercession of the newborn¹s namesake.
...
By the time the paramedics arrived there was still no pulse. Bonnie spent the 20-minute journey to the hospital in a separate ambulance from her husband and baby, lying alone, unaware if her son was dead or alive.
...
Five men eventually emerged with tears in their eyes. “They said to him: ‘Your son is alive’ and Travis understood in that moment that what they were really saying was: ‘He’s alive now but just for right now.’ The fact that they were crying meant that he knew that things were really bad
The miraculous breath had come after 61 excruciating minutes. James had breathed again at the moment doctors gave up their efforts and stopped to record his time of death. ...
Bonnie starts to explain to me the full extent of the miracle. “The way my doctor explained it to me was: ‘It’s amazing that James came back to life and it¹s a miracle that he is doing as well as he is.¹ Because he should have had massive organ failure and then they expected him to be very severely disabled. Then they thought that he would have very severe cerebral palsy. They thought that he would have to be strapped to a wheelchair for the rest of his life, have a feeding tube and probably be blind. They thought that mentally he would not be aware of anything. It was supposed to be pretty grim and that was if he even lived.”
Bonnie was able to bring her baby home after seven weeks in hospital. “As he continued I think they gave us an increasingly better prognosis. So it went from very severely disabled to: ‘OK, so he’s going to have cerebral palsy. We just don¹t know what it will look like.’ But he continued to get better and seemed more and more like a normal baby… I mean, there was always some big question marks for about the first six to 12 months just because he was a baby, so we had to wait for him to hit his milestones to know how complete the miracle was.
“But my husband, and I and family and friends, were all at home interacting with James when he was two and a half months old, when he was five months old, and were sitting there thinking: ‘This kid is normal. He’s like any of our other babies we¹ve seen at this age. This really is a miracle.'”
Well documented, happened in 2010 involving a modern medical facility. Explain that one.
Copied from Catholic Herald but if you Google "sheen miracle" you'll get a buttload of references.
Isolated incidents like that example are not enough to prove the proposition of 'miracles' - things that happen above and beyond natural causation. Unusual events are not miracles, they are simply improbable events, yet events that are within the bounds of possibility. Calling them 'miracles' does not mean they are caused by a supernatural entity.
The single most damaging thing to an economy is corruption.
You need to do a better job examining your presuppositions.
I said individually better off, f--- society.. For example lots of stuff I could have stolen from work with zero chance of getting caught. One job I had relatively free access to accounting records. Fake a few contracts with one conspirator and we'd both get rich. Because I had trusted access a little presto changeo on the computer and we'd both get rich. The books were so screwed up (government) nobody would ever notice.
One of the claims I don't accept on hypothetical moral dilemma is the "You know you won't get caught". It artificially eliminates the risk/reward calculation. Hell might not be real, but prison, especially Federal Prison Time, is a very real thing. Additionally, you would have a co-conspirator, a dishonest co-conspirator, which adds it's own flavor of risk.
How any times can you kill somebody for the money in their pockets? Compare that to the number of times you can trade with someone, with each of you deriving mutual benefit from the transactions?
Cooperation allows division of labor and specialization. This increases everyone's productivity, and lead to more goods and services for everyone. In general ever time you increase the order of magnitude of an economic unit, such as a city, productivity increases 10%. So, on an per person basis, 1000 people are 33% more productive than one person. But if the 1,000 can't trust each other, then that advantage evaporates, and they become 1000 individual islands.
Now extend the above example to include warfare. In general, who's more likely to win. The cohesive society, or the rogue individuals.
Outlaws only have to screw up once for their goose to be cooked. The long arm of the law only has to get him once.
So the bigger rat (instinctively) acts to give himself a preponderance of satisfying consequences, namely more play dominating the smaller rat.
Or the large rat simply applied what was applied to it by larger rats when it was young in order to encourage next gen individuals to remain interactive in a social structure group.
Prob not much different to parents at times letting their child win at chess.
Parents often have to remind the older children to ease off on the younger siblings and give them a chance, rather than always taking the easy oportunity to take advantage and dominate them in various activities.
So the 'altruism' one sees in some kids comes From the training from their parents not from some outside of the natural world God.
The strongest part being that there is not a single case of a proven miracle to hold up.
Quote
...
“When James was born the midwife scooped him up and put him in my hands. But I noticed that his legs and arms dangled down. He wasn’t moving. He wasn’t breathing. He wasn’t crying, he was kind of a blue colour. So I held him for a second and then my midwife took him and she began CPR.”
It was at this point that Bonnie fell into a state shock. Her friend, who was present at the birth, called an ambulance and her husband calmly performed an emergency baptism. At the moment that Travis traced water on his son¹s forehead and baptised him James Fulton, Bonnie’s friend began to pray for the intercession of the newborn¹s namesake.
...
By the time the paramedics arrived there was still no pulse. Bonnie spent the 20-minute journey to the hospital in a separate ambulance from her husband and baby, lying alone, unaware if her son was dead or alive.
...
Five men eventually emerged with tears in their eyes. “They said to him: ‘Your son is alive’ and Travis understood in that moment that what they were really saying was: ‘He’s alive now but just for right now.’ The fact that they were crying meant that he knew that things were really bad
The miraculous breath had come after 61 excruciating minutes. James had breathed again at the moment doctors gave up their efforts and stopped to record his time of death. ...
Bonnie starts to explain to me the full extent of the miracle. “The way my doctor explained it to me was: ‘It’s amazing that James came back to life and it¹s a miracle that he is doing as well as he is.¹ Because he should have had massive organ failure and then they expected him to be very severely disabled. Then they thought that he would have very severe cerebral palsy. They thought that he would have to be strapped to a wheelchair for the rest of his life, have a feeding tube and probably be blind. They thought that mentally he would not be aware of anything. It was supposed to be pretty grim and that was if he even lived.”
Bonnie was able to bring her baby home after seven weeks in hospital. “As he continued I think they gave us an increasingly better prognosis. So it went from very severely disabled to: ‘OK, so he’s going to have cerebral palsy. We just don¹t know what it will look like.’ But he continued to get better and seemed more and more like a normal baby… I mean, there was always some big question marks for about the first six to 12 months just because he was a baby, so we had to wait for him to hit his milestones to know how complete the miracle was.
“But my husband, and I and family and friends, were all at home interacting with James when he was two and a half months old, when he was five months old, and were sitting there thinking: ‘This kid is normal. He’s like any of our other babies we¹ve seen at this age. This really is a miracle.'”
Well documented, happened in 2010 involving a modern medical facility. Explain that one.
Copied from Catholic Herald but if you Google "sheen miracle" you'll get a buttload of references.
Hmmm,
When I search the medical journals, I don't find any results.
Claims are made, people testify to this or that according to their own experience and interpretation, but nothing can actually be verified or tested. The church proclaims it a 'miracle'
Isolated incidents like that example are not enough to prove the proposition of 'miracles' - things that happen above and beyond natural causation. Unusual events are not miracles, they are simply improbable events, yet events that are within the bounds of possibility. Calling them 'miracles' does not mean they are caused by a supernatural entity.
Miracles by definition are isolated incidences or they would be naturally caused. Since it is impossible to know everything you can't PROVE a supernatural cause. Take the Wayback machine to medieval times and give a plague victim an antibiotic - it's a miracle. But the case cited (not breathing for 61 minutes, no perceptible cardiac activity, with complete recovery) is so removed from all medical knowledge it's gotta make you think...
Isolated incidents like that example are not enough to prove the proposition of 'miracles' - things that happen above and beyond natural causation. Unusual events are not miracles, they are simply improbable events, yet events that are within the bounds of possibility. Calling them 'miracles' does not mean they are caused by a supernatural entity.
Miracles by definition are isolated incidences or they would be naturally caused. Since it is impossible to know everything you can't PROVE a supernatural cause. Take the Wayback machine to medieval times and give a plague victim an antibiotic - it's a miracle. But the case cited (not breathing for 61 minutes, no perceptible cardiac activity, with complete recovery) is so removed from all medical knowledge it's gotta make you think...
Not as removed as might first appear, after all we are talking about a new born, that just came out of fluid, and we have numerous cases of people submerged in water for long periods of time and suffering no brain damage. We know there are natural mechanism that explain this phenomenon.
We have seen some incredible miracles and they always try to discount them. Jesus was right when he said a person could come back from the dead and they still wouldn't believe. He did and they don't.
We have seen some incredible miracles and they always try to discount them. Jesus was right when he said a person could come back from the dead and they still wouldn't believe. He did and they don't.
Religious folk that believed Jesus walked on water rose from the dead and was result of a virgin birth,
Also believed the pagan Norse raid on Lindisfarne 973 and the devastating boubonic plague were punishments from their God.... and desperately responded with penitential acts aimed at tempering the Lord's wrath.
99.9999999999999% of the time the answer seems to be this >
AS,
You and I have touched base here a little bit, shared our position briefly, talked firearms and cartridges somewhat more than we have our personal perspectives.
On this matter, not that it means much to you, but I tend to agree with you. "Answers" to my own personal prayers usually result me feeling like I just got the big "GFY."
The believers here must remember the time John the Baptist was in prison. He had some doubts about this Jesus character and asked his buddies to investigate the situation, and the man Jesus. This of course was some time after Jesus had preached out of the Book of Isaiah "The spirit of the Lord is upon me to preach the good news, heal the sick, give the blind sight, make the lame walk, AND set the captives/prisoners free...."
Jesus told John's buddies, "Hey, go tell 'ol Johnny boy that ALL these things are being done, I'm doing it just like I said I would...ummm...however, about this prison situation you find yourself in...well...ahh... ummm...ah well..John you're not going to be one of those prisoners that gets set free. So John, it's probably best if you dont take offense concerning this disappointing news..." (of course I'm paraphrasing here). But that was the deal...no dice.
Then there should be clear evidence to support that proposition, better outcomes for believers, divine intervention, etc.
Best they can do is rely on the power of imagination as to cause and effect through their beliefs involving Bibilcal scripture fables and superstitions that were scribed by self interest driven Hebrew and christian radicals.
Ask christians what God did with the physical flesh and blood body of Jesus that was alleged to have ascended to heaven. And what possible use or value such would be in a spiritual realm.
I agree, I dont believe God answers prayers- from unbelievers.
Then there should be clear evidence to support that proposition, better outcomes for believers, divine intervention, etc.
That's biblically kinda ignorant...he even answered satan's "prayer" to screw with Job.
God is described as having a friendly wager with His angel, Satan, giving instructions on how far Satan could go in testing Job's faith, the limits being set by God himself, obeyed by Satan.
I agree, I dont believe God answers prayers- from unbelievers.
Then there should be clear evidence to support that proposition, better outcomes for believers, divine intervention, etc.
That's biblically kinda ignorant...he even answered satan's "prayer" to screw with Job.
God is described as having a friendly wager with His angel, Satan, giving instructions on how far Satan could go in testing Job's faith, the limits being set by God himself, obeyed by Satan.
Exactly.
Since "prayer" is conversing with God, satan, the "unbeliever" was then praying/conversing to/with God.
And too, many came to jesus as unbelievers, spoke with him, and left as new believers.? Hint: Many if not most.
But really, I'm more interested in the "Hunting Rifles" and "Free Classifieds" forums than the "How Many Are Dancing On The Head Of A Pin" forums, so I'll leave you fellas to your conversation.
Satan wasn't a nonbeliever. He believed, all right. James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
They're under eternal punishment for their rebellion against God. They know full well who Jesus is and they know what's coming for them. Angels seem to have full access to God, even the fallen ones. In Job, Satan has the ability to approach God directly...for now.
I agree, I dont believe God answers prayers- from unbelievers.
Then there should be clear evidence to support that proposition, better outcomes for believers, divine intervention, etc.
That's biblically kinda ignorant...he even answered satan's "prayer" to screw with Job.
God is described as having a friendly wager with His angel, Satan, giving instructions on how far Satan could go in testing Job's faith, the limits being set by God himself, obeyed by Satan.
Exactly.
Since "prayer" is conversing with God, satan, the "unbeliever" was then praying/conversing to/with God.
And too, many came to jesus as unbelievers, spoke with him, and left as new believers.? Hint: Many if not most.
But really, I'm more interested in the "Hunting Rifles" and "Free Classifieds" forums than the "How Many Are Dancing On The Head Of A Pin" forums, so I'll leave you fellas to your conversation.
Yes, I know that any unbelievers who want God to make them believers and ask Him into their heart, He will.
Asking for other things, I doubt. He says to believe you will receive. I dont think unbelievers believe when they ask, or else they wouldnt be unbelievers.
I ain't reading all the pages, but I will say this with certainty. God has spoken to me more than once and has also answered my prayers more than once. Thank you Jesus. To God be the glory!
Say what you will, I have a PERSONAL relationship with Jesus Christ.
Satan wasn't a nonbeliever. He believed, all right. James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
They're under eternal punishment for their rebellion against God. They know full well who Jesus is and they know what's coming for them. Angels seem to have full access to God, even the fallen ones. In Job, Satan has the ability to approach God directly...for now.
The role of satan in Judaism is to fulfill gods plan, to do the will of God by playing the adversary. Doing exactly as God orders in the book of Job. Satan just refers to anyone playing the role of adversary. Christianity altered the idea and role of Satan.
Someday he's going to be very, very sick, slowly dying as he gets old. It's going to be absolutely miserable. And he won't have any hope for anything better than trying to put a bullet in his own head. Because his suffering has no value, there's nothing redemptive about it, it's just gazing into the maw of blackness. He'll look back on his life and realize how senseless it was, just an automaton-like pursuit of temporary pleasure. The bad times will seem simply like failure. They won't have had any value. He might as well sucked on a bottle his entire life.
Nihilism is an ugly thing. Suicide is the Nihilist's only answer to suffering.
Satan wasn't a nonbeliever. He believed, all right. James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
They're under eternal punishment for their rebellion against God. They know full well who Jesus is and they know what's coming for them. Angels seem to have full access to God, even the fallen ones. In Job, Satan has the ability to approach God directly...for now.
Rock,
Yes that's true. I was meaning "believer" as one putting his trust in Jesus, and having relationship with him... a belief that is beyond an intellectual belief.
Praying to Santa has the same statistical outcomes as praying to god, just saying...
Read The Case For Miracles. It proves this statement false.
Lee Strobel, really??
And in what journal was this peer reviewed by the scientific community?
This notion that only that which has been "peer reviewed" is true, or likely to be correct, is illogical, authoritarian nonsense. It utterly begs the salient question.
Someday he's going to be very, very sick, slowly dying as he gets old. It's going to be absolutely miserable. And he won't have any hope for anything better than trying to put a bullet in his own head. Because his suffering has no value, there's nothing redemptive about it, it's just gazing into the maw of blackness. He'll look back on his life and realize how senseless it was, just an automaton-like pursuit of temporary pleasure. The bad times will seem simply like failure. They won't have had any value. He might as well sucked on a bottle his entire life.
Nihilism is an ugly thing. Suicide is the Nihilist's only answer to suffering.
Hahahaha that literally was pathetic.
Some how now we will be suicidal? Hahahahha you christians are a fugged up breed....
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
Some how now we will be suicidal? Hahahahha you christians are a fugged up breed....
Tell us about your plan to avoid the ravages of age. How are you going to deal with a diaper?
Better yet... from your dribble, how are you?
I assume I’ll be like the other old fug’s if Im im a diaper... i’ll wear a diaper and probably be in assisted living....
How is it god will do any different for you?
Where did suicide come from? My assumption is your rather confused here. Maybe people who are mentally strong enough to realize an invisible being that lives in this made up place heaven, that no actual living man has ever been to record this.... is probably mentally fit enough to understand the virtues of aging.
Praying to Santa has the same statistical outcomes as praying to god, just saying...
Read The Case For Miracles. It proves this statement false.
Lee Strobel, really??
And in what journal was this peer reviewed by the scientific community?
This notion that only that which has been "peer reviewed" is true, or likely to be correct, is illogical, authoritarian nonsense. It utterly begs the salient question.
Bob, that is why I think it is best to ask for His will to be done.
Well, I pray to Him all the time, mainly to forgive me for cussing, crap, with my luck i need all the help i can get. PTL, He says to bring All to Him in prayer.
I had a nice lady as a patient for many years who was gradually going down hill from hypertension induced kidney failure. Fairly poor, deceased husband, worker at an area church, had been on kidney list for years and had had 3 calls for a donor over a few years and gone in but in each time the kidney was too far gone or some problem prevented the sx.
I saw her one afternoon and checked her retinas and she said she was nearing the end and asked me to pray for her. Well, right there and then I knew she needed help I the worst way so I put my rt hand on her left shoulder and prayed the Lord would intervene and get her a kidney and save her.
A few months later she came back in looking much better and I asked her how things were going. She said the evening i prayed for her she went home and got in bed to rest and got the phone call to have her daughter bring her in right then. They had her a kidney.
That was about 5 years ago and I just saw her about a week ago walking out of Furrs in the mall.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
“Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!
But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money!”
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
This is a religious thread please refrain from applying logic.
If you don't believe, your right and you this this true for yourself, if you do believe you have allowed a spiritual transformation within yourself and it shows up with everything you experience. Inexplicable to those naysayers out there . I like to believe that quantum physics argues a case for Christ. Time and space is no longer linear and measurable. Who would of thunk? Perhaps Albert E, would agree. The mystery of faith.
God is described as having a friendly wager with His angel, Satan, giving instructions on how far Satan could go..
Exactly. Since "prayer" is conversing with God, satan, then"unbeliever" was then praying/conversing to/with God.
Well yes as the story goes there is exchange or conversation between the two..
But that does not mean there is such exhange between God and christians when they pray. Since most prayers fall flat, chances are the God they imagine isnt even listening.
Satan wasn't a nonbeliever. He believed, all right. James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
They're under eternal punishment for their rebellion against God. They know full well who Jesus is and they know what's coming for them. Angels seem to have full access to God, even the fallen ones. In Job, Satan has the ability to approach God directly...for now.
The role of satan in Judaism is to fulfill gods plan, to do the will of God by playing the adversary. Doing exactly as God orders in the book of Job. Satan just refers to anyone playing the role of adversary. Christianity altered the idea and role of Satan.
Actually, the Jews stole the idea of Satan from the Zoroastrians during their time in Persia.
God is described as having a friendly wager with His angel, Satan, giving instructions on how far Satan could go..
Exactly. Since "prayer" is conversing with God, satan, then"unbeliever" was then praying/conversing to/with God.
Well yes as the story goes there is exchange or conversation between the two..
But that does not mean there is such exhange between God and christians when they pray. Since most prayers fall flat, chances are the God they imagine isnt even listening.
Starman,
I think your point may be correct, it's quite possible, maybe even probable. Seems to me that there are a few biblical instances recorded wherein Jesus passed by folks that believed he could heal them. They probably cried out for his attention, and it seems he had other things on his mind. I'm at work (on lunch break), but later, if I'm feelin it, I might comment more about this.
Someday he's going to be very, very sick, slowly dying as he gets old. It's going to be absolutely miserable. And he won't have any hope for anything better than trying to put a bullet in his own head. Because his suffering has no value, there's nothing redemptive about it, it's just gazing into the maw of blackness. He'll look back on his life and realize how senseless it was, just an automaton-like pursuit of temporary pleasure. The bad times will seem simply like failure. They won't have had any value. He might as well sucked on a bottle his entire life.
Nihilism is an ugly thing. Suicide is the Nihilist's only answer to suffering.
But I'm not a Nihilist. Atheism does not equal Nihilist.
Praying to Santa has the same statistical outcomes as praying to god, just saying...
Read The Case For Miracles. It proves this statement false.
Lee Strobel, really??
And in what journal was this peer reviewed by the scientific community?
This notion that only that which has been "peer reviewed" is true, or likely to be correct, is illogical, authoritarian nonsense. It utterly begs the salient question.
Tarquin,
That was my polite was of saying Lee Storbel is not credible as a source, and has a reputation for fabricating stories, as some allege he did for the above referenced book.
Since he treads upon the domain of science by claiming "miracles" in this book, it's reasonable to ask what real experts have to say. Of course in this instance the answer is nothing because Strobel would never willingly subject his work to that level of scrutiny.
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
This is a religious thread please refrain from applying logic.
Yep, logic applies to the physical, not necessarily the spiritual. If God were logical, asswholes would be able to get their proof and unbelievers would get into heaven too, by proof rather than by faith in HIM.
By necessity, natural is not the supernatural. Everlasting life is supernatural and can only be experienced by the spiritual. Horses and dogs have natural, not the spiritual presence those created in GODs image can experience. Those who strive to put Him first and live a spirit filled life are, of course, more in tune with their spirit presence and, I think, more able to have success in calling for miracles and getting prayer answered. Ergo, His saying that the prayers of a righteous man availeth much.
Satan wasn't a nonbeliever. He believed, all right. James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
They're under eternal punishment for their rebellion against God. They know full well who Jesus is and they know what's coming for them. Angels seem to have full access to God, even the fallen ones. In Job, Satan has the ability to approach God directly...for now.
The role of satan in Judaism is to fulfill gods plan, to do the will of God by playing the adversary. Doing exactly as God orders in the book of Job. Satan just refers to anyone playing the role of adversary. Christianity altered the idea and role of Satan.
Actually, the Jews stole the idea of Satan from the Zoroastrians during their time in Persia.
Not much is original, the Jews/Israelites borrowed a lot of ideas from surrounding cultures, Adam and Eve, the flood, etc...and the word 'satan' was at times used in reference to anyone who played the role of adversary.
Exactly. That one or two "miracles" against thousands who got prayed over but died anyway. The evidence of your God isn't what I'd call overwhelming. Or if he exists, he's a fickle and vindictive SOB.
People in Australia and Puerto Rico are praying their hearts out. They got nada.
“Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!
But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money!”
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
This is a religious thread please refrain from applying logic.
Yep, logic applies to the physical, not necessarily the spiritual. If God were logical, asswholes would be able to get their proof and unbelievers would get into heaven too, by proof rather than by faith in HIM.
Rather strange criteria for entry into eternal paradise.
In sum, no empirical, scientifically rigorous evidence has ever been brought forth proving the power of prayer. And just think about it: if praying produced the prayed-for outcomes, no prayed-for mothers would ever die of breast cancer, no prayed-for teenagers would ever die on the operating table, no prayed-for dogs or cats would ever fail to return home, and tens of millions of praying people would never die from starvation resulting from a lack of rain. Three hundred million people have died from smallpox in the 20th century alone — clearly, all of their prayers, and their parents’ prayers, and their children’s prayers, and their spouses’ prayers, did not have the desired healing effect.
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
This is a religious thread please refrain from applying logic.
Yep, logic applies to the physical, not necessarily the spiritual. If God were logical, asswholes would be able to get their proof and unbelievers would get into heaven too, by proof rather than by faith in HIM.
Rather strange criteria for entry into eternal paradise.
Says you.
You'd want to tell us your plan for salvation and everlasting life I'm sure.
18 percent of the patients who had been prayed for suffered major complications such as strokes or heart attacks, compared to only 13 percent of the patients who did not receive any prayers.
Wrong prayers or wrong God?.. or Gods will?
Such results dont sound like something christians would want to own.
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
This is a religious thread please refrain from applying logic.
Yep, logic applies to the physical, not necessarily the spiritual. If God were logical, asswholes would be able to get their proof and unbelievers would get into heaven too, by proof rather than by faith in HIM.
Rather strange criteria for entry into eternal paradise.
Says you.
You'd want to tell us your plan for salvation and everlasting life I'm sure.
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
This is a religious thread please refrain from applying logic.
Yep, logic applies to the physical, not necessarily the spiritual. If God were logical, asswholes would be able to get their proof and unbelievers would get into heaven too, by proof rather than by faith in HIM.
Rather strange criteria for entry into eternal paradise.
Says you.
You'd want to tell us your plan for salvation and everlasting life I'm sure.
In sum, no empirical, scientifically rigorous evidence has ever been brought forth proving the power of prayer. And just think about it: if praying produced the prayed-for outcomes, no prayed-for mothers would ever die of breast cancer, no prayed-for teenagers would ever die on the operating table, no prayed-for dogs or cats would ever fail to return home, and tens of millions of praying people would never die from starvation resulting from a lack of rain. Three hundred million people have died from smallpox in the 20th century alone — clearly, all of their prayers, and their parents’ prayers, and their children’s prayers, and their spouses’ prayers, did not have the desired healing effect.
Blah blah blah...
Over 40 years of experiential faith and countless answered prayers. God is a daily, constant, immediate reality for me, every waking thought, every breath... mo real than real. This harping on atheism... I just cannot take it seriously. Grace awaken you.
3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
Its not a matter of scoffing, just basic questioning of beliefs, healthy skepticism. The world is full of contradictory beliefs, each believer convinced that they have the truth, but logically, not everything that is believed to be true can be true.
This is a religious thread please refrain from applying logic.
Yep, logic applies to the physical, not necessarily the spiritual. If God were logical, asswholes would be able to get their proof and unbelievers would get into heaven too, by proof rather than by faith in HIM.
Rather strange criteria for entry into eternal paradise.
Says you.
You'd want to tell us your plan for salvation and everlasting life I'm sure.
We are waiting.
Strawman. I make no claims about salvation or the criteria, merely pointing out that a rational lack of belief based on insufficient evidence to support a justified conviction of truth is an odd and trivial criteria to use for sorting those bound for damnation and eternal torment as opposed to those bound for eternal paradise.....even by human standards of justice and mercy.
3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
JG,
Hope you are having a fine evening, but I must say, I find your quote of a verse so thickly dripping of Gnosticism quite humorous.
3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
JG,
Hope you are having a fine evening, but I must say, I find your quote of a verse so thickly dripping of Gnosticism quite humorous.
Your post reminds me, "Who laughs loudest....."
You make the mistake of applying your life and your truths to the world, while not accepting the truths of others. A common but stupid mistake of many, extrapolitaing your experiences to drown the experiences and knowledge of others. You are not the know it all you perceive yourself to be. Now tell us all, since this didnt happen to all knowing you, it didnt happen to him too. Make the fool of yourself HE said you would. Lean on your own understanding as HE, ages ago said you would, but dont expect others to believe in you. Others have real lives too.
3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
JG,
Hope you are having a fine evening, but I must say, I find your quote of a verse so thickly dripping of Gnosticism quite humorous.
Your post reminds me, "Who laughs loudest....."
You make the mistake of applying your life and your truths to the world, while not accepting the truths of others. A common but stupid mistake of many, extrapolitaing your experiences to drown the experiences and knowledge of others. You are not the know it all you perceive yourself to be. Now tell us all, since this didnt happen to all knowing you, it didnt happen to him too. Make the fool of yourself HE said you would. Lean on your own understanding as HE, ages ago said you would, but dont expect others to believe in you. Others have real lives too.
Here's his original version of his story:
“Nigel, an ambulance officer, responded to the airport call for help. Along with another officer with him and a paramedic who arrived shortly, they began to work for my recovery. After thirty minutes during which time there was no heartbeat nor breathing at all; suddenly my heart and breathing began to function. I was taken to the hospital.”
Notice it was 30 minutes, and not 45, and he never made it to the ambulance, no paperwork, no blood coagulating in his arms.....
Of course he was getting CPR for the entire 30 minutes.....
Which depends on verifiable evidence, testimony alone is not sufficient when it comes to extraordinary claims and probability.
Again, ones true and factual experience ‘can’ prove a belief TO THEM. TO THEM, other than their true and factual experience, no additional “verifiable evidence” is required.
Again, ones true and factual experience ‘can’ prove a belief TO THEM. .. no additional “verifiable evidence” is required.
One can have true and factual auditory and visual hallucinations, where one did in fact completely imagine it all.
And one can also have a true and factual experience that wasn’t imagined at all. In ‘either’ case, the belief ‘can’ be proven TO THEM based on their experience.
What is true and factual remains true and factual regardless of anyone's belief or disbelief.
AT LAST!!!
Finally something true.... and factual!
Jesus reigns....
True, whether you believe or disbelieve.
Please prove this.
As I have noted before.... God is real and present in this world. If you do not know Him, you don’t know him. Simple.
However, if you seek Him, you will find that He begins a relationship with you. He does indeed prove Himself to the seeker. I have the proof. I also have answered prayer.
Consider this.... mankind desires what has been referred to as a “domesticated” God. A God who does one’s own bidding. A God that serves him. Mankind wants a God that works for him and who is the kind of God that is of his own manufacture.
If one is praying to a God of his own “ belief” or creation, then no wonder his prayers are not effective. He is is essence, praying to himself.....not to the Eternal Father.
The question: Is “prayer effective” is perhaps poorly defined. Prayer with the Father certainly is. Prayer offered up to the God of one’s own imagination .... “not so much.”
I wonder if much of the angst shown by the non-believers here is that they know somehow that “a God” is out there but they cannot “make it work” for them. I would ask .... “to whom are you praying?”
Many seem to want God.... but on their terms..... it does not work that way.
What is true and factual remains true and factual regardless of anyone's belief or disbelief.
AT LAST!!!
Finally something true.... and factual!
Jesus reigns....
True, whether you believe or disbelieve.
Believed to be true, but not demonstrated or proven to be true and factual.
As noted before, you are totally wrong. God has indeed proven and demonstrated truth to me.
Seek and you will find....and you will have proof......... don’t seek and you will not find and not have proof.
Pride ..and absence of humility often proves to be a barrier.....
Objective evidence is something anyone can access, examine and draw a conclusion. You are talking about subjective experience, which may satisfy you, and that's fine, but objective evidence it is not.
Tell us about your plan to avoid the ravages of age. How are you going to deal with a diaper?
Better yet... from your dribble, how are you?
I assume I’ll be like the other old fug’s if Im im a diaper... i’ll wear a diaper and probably be in assisted living....
How is it god will do any different for you?
Where did suicide come from? My assumption is your rather confused here. Maybe people who are mentally strong enough to realize an invisible being that lives in this made up place heaven, that no actual living man has ever been to record this.... is probably mentally fit enough to understand the virtues of aging.
Because you aren't much different from a dog. Sure, you can talk, but once the good times end what is the point in letting the dog suffer? I'm sure you'll choose a bullet.
The difference between you & I is that I understand that suffering has value. It has value because the end of life isn't the end of me. My suffering can be united in redemption with the cross. Yours...is just in vain.
What is true and factual remains true and factual regardless of anyone's belief or disbelief.
AT LAST!!!
Finally something true.... and factual!
Jesus reigns....
True, whether you believe or disbelieve.
Believed to be true, but not demonstrated or proven to be true and factual.
As noted before, you are totally wrong. God has indeed proven and demonstrated truth to me.
Seek and you will find....and you will have proof......... don’t seek and you will not find and not have proof.
Pride ..and absence of humility often proves to be a barrier.....
Objective evidence is something anyone can access, examine and draw a conclusion. You are talking about subjective experience, which may satisfy you, and that's fine, but objective evidence it is not.
What is true and factual remains true and factual regardless of anyone's belief or disbelief.
AT LAST!!!
Finally something true.... and factual!
Jesus reigns....
True, whether you believe or disbelieve.
Believed to be true, but not demonstrated or proven to be true and factual.
As noted before, you are totally wrong. God has indeed proven and demonstrated truth to me.
Seek and you will find....and you will have proof......... don’t seek and you will not find and not have proof.
Pride ..and absence of humility often proves to be a barrier.....
Objective evidence is something anyone can access, examine and draw a conclusion. You are talking about subjective experience, which may satisfy you, and that's fine, but objective evidence it is not.
Yep, “that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.”
Sure, that's your right. If it causes no harm and brings comfort, it is your own business.
Tell us about your plan to avoid the ravages of age. How are you going to deal with a diaper?
Better yet... from your dribble, how are you?
I assume I’ll be like the other old fug’s if Im im a diaper... i’ll wear a diaper and probably be in assisted living....
How is it god will do any different for you?
Where did suicide come from? My assumption is your rather confused here. Maybe people who are mentally strong enough to realize an invisible being that lives in this made up place heaven, that no actual living man has ever been to record this.... is probably mentally fit enough to understand the virtues of aging.
Because you aren't much different from a dog. Sure, you can talk, but once the good times end what is the point in letting the dog suffer? I'm sure you'll choose a bullet.
The difference between you & I is that I understand that suffering has value. It has value because the end of life isn't the end of me. My suffering can be united in redemption with the cross. Yours...is just in vain.
I just hope these believers aren’t prosecutors or jurors..
You peeps have trouble understanding what proper evidence is.
I did acid and shrooms a few times when I was younger, so I can relate to you guys not understanding what you are seeing.
Interesting comment....who will be your prosecutor and jury at your final judgment?
Again... your confused. When science decides I am no more, I am no more... the same as you. I will just be accepting of whats happening, you on the other hand will still be dumb enough to be asking for forgiveness to an imaginary being.
Its weird, when I got older, the eastern bunny stopped visiting me....
You let your crippled dogs suffer? What is charitable here? To allow the animal to needlessly suffer or to put it out of it's misery? What would be charitable if YOU were in incurable, intolerable pain?
I just hope these believers aren’t prosecutors or jurors..
You peeps have trouble understanding what proper evidence is.
I did acid and shrooms a few times when I was younger, so I can relate to you guys not understanding what you are seeing.
Interesting comment....who will be your prosecutor and jury at your final judgment?
Again... your confused. When science decides I am no more, I am no more... the same as you. I will just be accepting of whats happening, you on the other hand will still be dumb enough to be asking for forgiveness to an imaginary being.
Its weird, when I got older, the eastern bunny stopped visiting me....
Can you prove that you cease to exist when you are “no more?”
I just hope these believers aren’t prosecutors or jurors..
You peeps have trouble understanding what proper evidence is.
I did acid and shrooms a few times when I was younger, so I can relate to you guys not understanding what you are seeing.
Interesting comment....who will be your prosecutor and jury at your final judgment?
Again... your confused. When science decides I am no more, I am no more... the same as you. I will just be accepting of whats happening, you on the other hand will still be dumb enough to be asking for forgiveness to an imaginary being.
Its weird, when I got older, the eastern bunny stopped visiting me....
Can you prove that you cease to exist when you are “no more?”
If not, why would you believe it?
The burden of proof isnt on me here. It would be on the “believers” with no evidence other than hearsay.
I just hope these believers aren’t prosecutors or jurors..
You peeps have trouble understanding what proper evidence is.
I did acid and shrooms a few times when I was younger, so I can relate to you guys not understanding what you are seeing.
Interesting comment....who will be your prosecutor and jury at your final judgment?
Again... your confused. When science decides I am no more, I am no more... the same as you. I will just be accepting of whats happening, you on the other hand will still be dumb enough to be asking for forgiveness to an imaginary being.
Its weird, when I got older, the eastern bunny stopped visiting me....
Can you prove that you cease to exist when you are “no more?”
If not, why would you believe it?
The burden of proof isnt on me here. It would be on the “believers” with no evidence other than hearsay.
Ah yes, the “burden of proof argument”..... the unbelievers retreat, the last resort ....,
But, we will play your game.....you are the one that stated that when you are “no more,” then you are no more. So, as you say, the burden of proof is on you.
But I'm not a Nihilist. Atheism does not equal Nihilist.
So what comes after death then? On what basis do you believe this?
Decomposition.... or in some cases storage or spreading of ashes from your burnt body.
I know you're not AS, but I suspect his answer is similar.
Anyway, so once you are dead, there's nothing left but detritus. Nothing of any note in other words. That's nihilism.
Hahahaha again, your mistaken in your use of that word, several people have told you that...
I have morals. One doesnt need to be christian to have morals. Your use of that word is entirely wrong even if it meant what your using it as, because your using it as if someone is or isnt christian.
I just hope these believers aren’t prosecutors or jurors..
You peeps have trouble understanding what proper evidence is.
I did acid and shrooms a few times when I was younger, so I can relate to you guys not understanding what you are seeing.
Interesting comment....who will be your prosecutor and jury at your final judgment?
Again... your confused. When science decides I am no more, I am no more... the same as you. I will just be accepting of whats happening, you on the other hand will still be dumb enough to be asking for forgiveness to an imaginary being.
Its weird, when I got older, the eastern bunny stopped visiting me....
Can you prove that you cease to exist when you are “no more?”
If not, why would you believe it?
The burden of proof isnt on me here. It would be on the “believers” with no evidence other than hearsay.
Ah yes, the “burden of proof argument”..... the unbelievers retreat, the last resort ....,
But, we will play your game.....you are the one that stated that when you are “no more,” then you are no more. So, as you say, the burden of proof is on you.
What say you?
Hahahahaha your an everyday scholar...
You asked me to prove to you that I will cease to exist once Im dead.... well Im still alive, so no, I cant prove what your asking me to prove.
You believe that by me saying when someone is dead, they are gone... is incorrect, and there is beyond substantial evidence to show that to be correct. Therefore, the burden is in fact on you to show we go to heaven or hell... because no one on this earth has been there.
So we arent playing any games... we are discussing fact from fiction, and your inability to accept reality.
Nope, look up definitions for nihilism. Tyrone is yet again correct.
But, let’s go back to your assertion of “no more.”
You made it but the absence of your reply seems telling.
What about it?
Is both of you googles broke...
ni·hil·ism /ˈnīəˌlizəm,ˈnēəˌlizəm/ Learn to pronounce noun the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless
You only looked far enough to find a convenient answer.....
Try again.....
Nihilism..... philosophy that is antithetical to that which is reputedly meaningful in life......postmodernism rejection of theism “entails nihilism.”
But, when debating this subject, be aware that some will use the word “nihilism” and then narrowly define it so they can deny it in themselves. Of course, this can work both ways. Prolly a waste of time to discuss further.
So, back to a more relevant subject.... do you believe that “you” cease to exist when you are “no more?”
If so, why.....
Anyway, I gotta get to my agenda for the day..... til’ later.
My dad's best friend died on the operating table. When they brought him back he claims to have been to the other side. He stood outside the gates of Heaven but no one was there to let him in...then a vile woman on a horse came up on him, read his sons' names from a list and mentioned the whole "sins of the father" thing. Finally the woman was standing over his hospital bed just scaring him to death with Hell talk and a light would come from the corner of the room and she would retreat into the shadows. He got saved after that.
You realize, you two brainiacs are not arguing the definition of the word with me, but yet the english language? I didn’t write the dictionary...
According to the “good book” in this sense, the dictionary, you two diddlers are wrong.... very very wrong.
So, I take it that you would rather forget your statement about ceasing to exist at your death.
You would rather stick to arguing word definitions.
Safer for you because you don’t have to back up what you say nor even explain your comments.
But, I will try again..... why do you seem certain that “you” will “no more” at your death? How could you possibly know this?
The answer is that you cannot know this, but you speak like it is incontrovertible fact.
My man... I guess we are at an impasse..
As I keep posing the same question to you... how do you know other wise.
You see, the non believers, we incorporate logic.... meaning, if there is no hard evidence it isnt factual. This is pretty much how any actual scientist/historian/investigator would form a hypothesis.
You on the other hand are running with mythology.
my·thol·o·gy /məˈTHäləjē/ Learn to pronounce noun 1. a collection of myths, especially one belonging to a particular religious or cultural tradition.
And thats all christianity is, myths, as there is no hard evidence to support anything.
Again, I ask, since the world is only populated by 29% Christians, but 24% islamic and 14% hindus, 8% buddists, meaning 46% of the worlds population that is religious believes something entirely different than your christian point of view... and 15% being unaffiliated.... how can the minority be so sure they are 100% correct?
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
I just hope these believers aren’t prosecutors or jurors..
You peeps have trouble understanding what proper evidence is.
I did acid and shrooms a few times when I was younger, so I can relate to you guys not understanding what you are seeing.
Interesting comment....who will be your prosecutor and jury at your final judgment?
Again... your confused. When science decides I am no more, I am no more... the same as you. I will just be accepting of whats happening, you on the other hand will still be dumb enough to be asking for forgiveness to an imaginary being.
Its weird, when I got older, the eastern bunny stopped visiting me....
Can you prove that you cease to exist when you are “no more?”
If not, why would you believe it?
The burden of proof isnt on me here. It would be on the “believers” with no evidence other than hearsay.
Ah yes, the “burden of proof argument”..... the unbelievers retreat, the last resort ....,
But, we will play your game.....you are the one that stated that when you are “no more,” then you are no more. So, as you say, the burden of proof is on you.
What say you?
Rather than a last retreat, burden of proof is, or should be standard practice.
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
What is true and factual remains true and factual regardless of anyone's belief or disbelief.
AT LAST!!!
Finally something true.... and factual!
Jesus reigns....
True, whether you believe or disbelieve.
Please prove this.
You are saying show me and I will believe... The bible principle teaches a God who says believe me and I will show you. Psalm 27:13 I had fainted unless I had BELIEVED TO SEE the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living...believe to see...not see to believe...by the way, it is the goodness of the Lord that leads one to repentance. Roman's 2:4
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
Is astrology real?
It's all fine Travis. AAs are as smart as the Japanese. They are 11 % of the general and prison population.
They dont put lieberals or commies or muzzies in office. They dont use welfare more than the Chinese. Detroit is doing great. Afreka is doing wonderful.
What is true and factual remains true and factual regardless of anyone's belief or disbelief.
AT LAST!!!
Finally something true.... and factual!
Jesus reigns....
True, whether you believe or disbelieve.
Please prove this.
You are saying show me and I will believe... The bible principle teaches a God who says believe me and I will show you. Psalm 27:13 I had fainted unless I had BELIEVED TO SEE the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living...believe to see...not see to believe...by the way, it is the goodness of the Lord that leads one to repentance. Roman's 2:4
The Qur'an may say something different, the Tibetan book something else again, the Gita differing from both.....
God does answer prayers, according to His will. Where we often fail is in praying for a particular thing to be a particular way, while giving not the slightest thought to His will and its effect on whether our prayer is answered as we expect or in some other way. We were counseled to pray in accordance with the will of God, and then we can’t figure out why we didn’t get what we asked for when we pray for the satisfaction of our selfish desires. Like a three year old asking for a Corvette and a 1911 for Christmas, we get all butthurt when the Father seemingly ignores what we want...
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
Is astrology real?
It's all fine Travis. AAs are as smart as the Japanese. They are 11 % of the general and prison population.
They dont put lieberals or commies or muzzies in office. They dont use welfare more than the Chinese. Detroit is doing great. Afreka is doing wonderful.
Yadayadayada.
You are ever vigilant for an excuse to interject your virulent racism into a discussion having nothing to do with race---and this while defending the divinity of God. You are precisely why many people conclude that those who profess deep religious devotion are, fundamentally, frauds and fakes. You are Exhibit A of that evidence.
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
Is astrology real?
Of course it is. Even satan has been given some power to work for and against those who open themselves to him. Witchcraft, astrology, and the like can seem very real when the author of those things sees it as useful to make something happen to cause a misled person to fall deeper into confusion.
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
Is astrology real?
It's all fine Travis. AAs are as smart as the Japanese. They are 11 % of the general and prison population.
They dont put lieberals or commies or muzzies in office. They dont use welfare more than the Chinese. Detroit is doing great. Afreka is doing wonderful.
Yadayadayada.
You are ever vigilant for an excuse to interject your virulent racism into a discussion having nothing to do with race---and this while defending the divinity of God. You are precisely why many people conclude that those who profess deep religious devotion are, fundamentally, frauds and fakes. You are Exhibit A of that evidence.
Coming from you I appreciate that. Of course the skewed prison populations are the result of racism.
You realize, you two brainiacs are not arguing the definition of the word with me, but yet the english language? I didn’t write the dictionary...
According to the “good book” in this sense, the dictionary, you two diddlers are wrong.... very very wrong.
Because you saw it on the internet, it must be right?! I explained why the def is wrong and that's what you come up with? Of course, I'm correct. That definition is demonstrably false.
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
Is astrology real?
It's all fine Travis. AAs are as smart as the Japanese. They are 11 % of the general and prison population.
They dont put lieberals or commies or muzzies in office. They dont use welfare more than the Chinese. Detroit is doing great. Afreka is doing wonderful.
Yadayadayada.
You are ever vigilant for an excuse to interject your virulent racism into a discussion having nothing to do with race---and this while defending the divinity of God. You are precisely why many people conclude that those who profess deep religious devotion are, fundamentally, frauds and fakes. You are Exhibit A of that evidence.
Coming from you I appreciate that. Of course the skewed prison populations are the result of racism.
No. They're not, you idiot. But the fact that the IQs of Asians and Ashkenashi Jews are substantially higher than Caucasians is no reason to deny Caucasions their equal rights under the law or to refer to them as sub-human.
I'm sure Tarq and Ejp are quite well versed in Ezra and Deut. Its quite easy for them to see there that God must have been a racist too, not wanting unbelieving heathens mixed in with His nations of believers.
You realize, you two brainiacs are not arguing the definition of the word with me, but yet the english language? I didn’t write the dictionary...
According to the “good book” in this sense, the dictionary, you two diddlers are wrong.... very very wrong.
So, I take it that you would rather forget your statement about ceasing to exist at your death.
You would rather stick to arguing word definitions.
Safer for you because you don’t have to back up what you say nor even explain your comments.
But, I will try again..... why do you seem certain that “you” will “no more” at your death? How could you possibly know this?
The answer is that you cannot know this, but you speak like it is incontrovertible fact.
My man... I guess we are at an impasse..
As I keep posing the same question to you... how do you know other wise.
You see, the non believers, we incorporate logic.... meaning, if there is no hard evidence it isnt factual. This is pretty much how any actual scientist/historian/investigator would form a hypothesis.
You on the other hand are running with mythology.
my·thol·o·gy /məˈTHäləjē/ Learn to pronounce noun 1. a collection of myths, especially one belonging to a particular religious or cultural tradition.
And thats all christianity is, myths, as there is no hard evidence to support anything.
Again, I ask, since the world is only populated by 29% Christians, but 24% islamic and 14% hindus, 8% buddists, meaning 46% of the worlds population that is religious believes something entirely different than your christian point of view... and 15% being unaffiliated.... how can the minority be so sure they are 100% correct?
Yep, impasse.
However, the fact remains that you do not know that when you die, you are “no more.” You said it but will not explain why or how. Ok.
But, this is important. Most folks seem to believe.... maybe hope, idk.... that somehow, their “essence” or soul will live on or remain cognitive after death. You are sure that they are wrong.
29% Christians, 24% Islamic, 14% Hindus and 8% Buddhists .... that’s 75% and it is good bet that many of the unaffiliated have hopes that somehow their soul will live on. This idea of the human soul living beyond death is pretty common.
Many will perhaps be surprised that their soul does indeed have existence after their death.
Most folks would accept being a three-legged dog than a helpless worm that your God describe you as.
Originally Posted by DBT
Rather than a last retreat, burden of proof is, or should be standard practice.
Christians have no problem with the requirement of proof in instances where they are accused of a crime. and thanks to pagan Roman law origins of the justice system, they are innocent until proven guilty.
they woud be outraged and scream gross injustice if conviction occurs without burden of proof.
Originally Posted by TF49
As noted before, you are totally wrong. God has indeed proven and demonstrated truth to me.
..... “that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.”
Defendants have claimed God told them to kill someone, If you know of any court (that gets people to swear on the Bible) that has ever accepted a God did such thing , you should cite the case.
Your claims are no more verfiable or believable than the type I mentioned.
You realize, you two brainiacs are not arguing the definition of the word with me, but yet the english language? I didn’t write the dictionary...
According to the “good book” in this sense, the dictionary, you two diddlers are wrong.... very very wrong.
Because you saw it on the internet, it must be right?! I explained why the def is wrong and that's what you come up with? Of course, I'm correct. That definition is demonstrably false.
You copied and pasted wikipedia, the site that has information entered by its users and openly tells you it cannot be referenced as 100% factual.
You realize, you two brainiacs are not arguing the definition of the word with me, but yet the english language? I didn’t write the dictionary...
According to the “good book” in this sense, the dictionary, you two diddlers are wrong.... very very wrong.
So, I take it that you would rather forget your statement about ceasing to exist at your death.
You would rather stick to arguing word definitions.
Safer for you because you don’t have to back up what you say nor even explain your comments.
But, I will try again..... why do you seem certain that “you” will “no more” at your death? How could you possibly know this?
The answer is that you cannot know this, but you speak like it is incontrovertible fact.
My man... I guess we are at an impasse..
As I keep posing the same question to you... how do you know other wise.
You see, the non believers, we incorporate logic.... meaning, if there is no hard evidence it isnt factual. This is pretty much how any actual scientist/historian/investigator would form a hypothesis.
You on the other hand are running with mythology.
my·thol·o·gy /məˈTHäləjē/ Learn to pronounce noun 1. a collection of myths, especially one belonging to a particular religious or cultural tradition.
And thats all christianity is, myths, as there is no hard evidence to support anything.
Again, I ask, since the world is only populated by 29% Christians, but 24% islamic and 14% hindus, 8% buddists, meaning 46% of the worlds population that is religious believes something entirely different than your christian point of view... and 15% being unaffiliated.... how can the minority be so sure they are 100% correct?
Yep, impasse.
However, the fact remains that you do not know that when you die, you are “no more.” You said it but will not explain why or how. Ok.
But, this is important. Most folks seem to believe.... maybe hope, idk.... that somehow, their “essence” or soul will live on or remain cognitive after death. You are sure that they are wrong.
29% Christians, 24% Islamic, 14% Hindus and 8% Buddhists .... that’s 75% and it is good bet that many of the unaffiliated have hopes that somehow their soul will live on. This idea of the human soul living beyond death is pretty common.
Many will perhaps be surprised that their soul does indeed have existence after their death.
We shall see.....
Are you sure I am wrong... again, you believe in something that is incapable of being proven. Pure logic would say my assumption is correct.
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
How many thousand years do you looney tunes need to prove something? Your various seculars cant even agree with what happened or will happen with god/jesus/ and afterlife amongst yourselves. You’ve has over 2k years since the so called mesiah himself and nothing is still proven....
Funny you brought up the flat earth... Isaiah 11:12 Psalm 104:5 Revelation 7:1
The bell curve? ..... hey man, you realize Ben Carson was a top Neurosurgeon... you were an Ophthalmologist. I hope you see that curve you dumb racist [bleep].
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
Is astrology real?
It's all fine Travis. AAs are as smart as the Japanese. They are 11 % of the general and prison population.
They dont put lieberals or commies or muzzies in office. They dont use welfare more than the Chinese. Detroit is doing great. Afreka is doing wonderful.
Yadayadayada.
You are ever vigilant for an excuse to interject your virulent racism into a discussion having nothing to do with race---and this while defending the divinity of God. You are precisely why many people conclude that those who profess deep religious devotion are, fundamentally, frauds and fakes. You are Exhibit A of that evidence.
Im 99% this guy caught his wife “mudsharking” on him at some point... something is up with him... literally every post from him is something to do with black people, its too the extreme.
Bob: What kind of shotgun shells you shooting jag?
Jag : not those stupid wife beating black ones. Jesus hates black shotgun shells. They’d probably steal my shotgun.
How many thousand years do you looney tunes need to prove something? Your various seculars cant even agree with what happened or will happen with god/jesus/ and afterlife amongst yourselves. You’ve has over 2k years since the so called mesiah himself and nothing is still proven.... .
christianity is a complex clustrFk conglomeraton of competitve self interest driven highly subjective varied beliefs partly derived from previous pagan mythologies...its like the 'frankenstein' of religion. has been for over 2K yrs and not going to change anytime soon if ever.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
That's the most ridiculous argument you've made yet, and that's saying something. Perhaps I should insinuate that your SD has slipped so far down the negative slope that your type are incapable of making rational argument. If you can't keep it honest, or at least civil, shut up. I know you can do better than a mean-spirited rant.
You havent the mental capacity to comprehend the fact that just because something hasnt been proven doesnt mean it isnt true.
There was a time cig smoking had not been proven bad. It was.
There was a time when science thought the world flat. Some thought it was spherical but they had no proof. They were correct.
Sorry you cant seem to grasp that or figure out such deep subjects by your own self and need the help of others to remember such. You would have spent your time explaining mythology.
You cant even grasp facts that provide proof like "The Bell Curve".
The fact your running blather confuses then convinces you is just more proof of your stupidity.
Is astrology real?
It's all fine Travis. AAs are as smart as the Japanese. They are 11 % of the general and prison population.
They dont put lieberals or commies or muzzies in office. They dont use welfare more than the Chinese. Detroit is doing great. Afreka is doing wonderful.
Yadayadayada.
You are ever vigilant for an excuse to interject your virulent racism into a discussion having nothing to do with race---and this while defending the divinity of God. You are precisely why many people conclude that those who profess deep religious devotion are, fundamentally, frauds and fakes. You are Exhibit A of that evidence.
Im 99% this guy caught his wife “mudsharking” on him at some point... something is up with him... literally every post from him is something to do with black people, its too the extreme.
Bob: What kind of shotgun shells you shooting jag?
Jag : not those stupid wife beating black ones. Jesus hates black shotgun shells. They’d probably steal my shotgun.
But I'm not a Nihilist. Atheism does not equal Nihilist.
So what comes after death then? On what basis do you believe this?
Decomposition.... or in some cases storage or spreading of ashes from your burnt body.
I know you're not AS, but I suspect his answer is similar.
Anyway, so once you are dead, there's nothing left but detritus. Nothing of any note in other words. That's nihilism.
Hahahaha again, your mistaken in your use of that word, several people have told you that...
I have morals. One doesnt need to be christian to have morals. Your use of that word is entirely wrong even if it meant what your using it as, because your using it as if someone is or isnt christian.
Upon what do you base your morals? A week or so ago I read a book about canables. It was moral for them to kill and eat folks from other tribes.
Morals apart from God are what we make them. But we humans have discovered absolute mortality which comes from God. When those savages learned about Jesus in the 1960's they stopped that activity without any outside coercement.
But I'm not a Nihilist. Atheism does not equal Nihilist.
So what comes after death then? On what basis do you believe this?
Decomposition.... or in some cases storage or spreading of ashes from your burnt body.
I know you're not AS, but I suspect his answer is similar.
Anyway, so once you are dead, there's nothing left but detritus. Nothing of any note in other words. That's nihilism.
Hahahaha again, your mistaken in your use of that word, several people have told you that...
I have morals. One doesnt need to be christian to have morals. Your use of that word is entirely wrong even if it meant what your using it as, because your using it as if someone is or isnt christian.
Upon what do you base your morals? A week or so ago I read a book about canables. It was moral for them to kill and eat folks from other tribes.
Morals apart from God are what we make them. But we humans have discovered absolute mortality which comes from God. When those savages learned about Jesus in the 1960's they stopped that activity without any outside coercement.
So they werent coerced huh? Who taught them about this so called jesus? Let me guess... this was some tribe in south america? Somehow god/jesus hadnt made it there in 2k years, yet some white christian missionary came to spread the gospel?
I feel sorry for you Ejp 1234. Hopefully you except God before you die!!!!
I know Him! I had a stroke in 2008. It was his through grace that I’m alive today that I can walk, talk, and think. Not always spell.😁.
But i am!!!!!!
Absolutely nothing to do with modern medicine?
Didn’t say that! But who do you think aloud man to make modern medicine!
Well, I feel sorry for you too Whelenman... not only can you not spell... though you admitted to it.
Your mind doesn’t comprehend progressive education. Man gets smarter in time from previous experience. Gods will didn’t make your laptop thinner nor your fuel mileage better.
Maybe god will ALLOW you to to utilize spell check?
I feel sorry for you Ejp 1234. Hopefully you except God before you die!!!!
I know Him! I had a stroke in 2008. It was his through grace that I’m alive today that I can walk, talk, and think. Not always spell.😁.
But i am!!!!!!
Absolutely nothing to do with modern medicine?
Didn’t say that! But who do you think aloud man to make modern medicine!
Well, I feel sorry for you too Whelenman... not only can you not spell... though you admitted to it.
Your mind doesn’t comprehend progressive education. Man gets smarter in time from previous experience. Gods will didn’t make your laptop thinner nor your fuel mileage better.
Maybe god will ALLOW you to to utilize spell check?
These threads always devolve into one side believing the message delivered by Christ. They defend their position of faith relying upon what Christians believe to be the ultimate source of proof, the Bible. Through faith we believe, through faith we have eternal life.
The other side dismisses the Bible out of hand and mocks the teachings of Christ. They don’t view the Bible with reverence like Christians do. They laugh at it, they belittle it, they besmirch those that believe in it. They demand proof of faith in order to believe in faith. 😁 They demand an undefined threshold of proof that MY FAITH must meet in order for them to BELIEVE.
The other side has FAITH....our burden of proof has been met. It’s revealed in the Bible and in our personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It’s through that personal relationship, the experiences we have in our daily lives and with open hearts that we can see God’s hand in our lives. I can’t prove my experience to someone else nor can I prove what my personal relationship with someone is like, especially if they don’t care to hear about it. Just because I can’t prove what my relationship with someone is like doesn’t mean that relationship isn’t real or doesn’t exist.
I have faith that science will continue to show us the real answers.
We all know that science, philosophy and religion all have the same origin, don't we? I'm suprised that religion manages to persist as long as it has. I think time can be better spent than worshiping false gods.
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
What about your faith-? Its on display every time you post, yet you exempt it from your own critique.
We all know that science, philosophy and religion all have the same origin, don't we? I'm suprised that religion manages to persist as long as it has.
The sober reality of this world can get rather depressing for some, another world of make believe can help sooth and distract, offering some temporary relief.
In war soldiers can tell themselves "the war will Be over soon and we will be home for christmas"
That can help some better deal with the constantly piling up bodies, stench, fatigue, fear, misery, hunger, etc. Now if one can imagine something way superior like a heaven, it may even better assist in convincing people that all the terrible suffering is worthwhile.
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
What about your faith-? Its on display every time you post, yet you exempt it from your own critique.
Equivocation. If I point out what the essential definition of faith is, it is not my definition but the given definition as used in the English language. I am not making anything up., Blount used the recognized definition of faith back in the 1600's, as quoted. I can and do support what I say.
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
You are not correct. Faith is not as you say ….”a belief held without the support of evidence…..” That may be your thinking but it most certainly not biblical nor in line with basic Christian tenets.
In brief, here are the basics:
First, faith is “being sure of what hope for and certain of what we do not see.” Now, your natural mind will object and say that I am describing belief without any evidence for that belief. (see Hebrews 11:1)
Your dictionary may describe faith as simply as “belief in and devotion to God.” There is more to it than that.
So, second, faith is a gift….. a gift….. from God. He gives that faith to us. Yep, that simple. God gives us the faith to believe in Him and to be “certain” of what we do not see.
This is the “proof” that God provides to us and for us. (see Ephesians 2:8-9)
As had been referred to previously…. “…He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.” (see Hebrews 11:6)
You like to quote Aquinas but dont care about his claims?
You either buy his story or you have reason to doubt it.
Which is it?
And what do you use/require to support your choice?
As far as what Aquinas says he can kiss my butt. I look at the quality of his arguments, can I better them or not. I really don't care if he can fly up his own apex or not.
Man can prove the internet/WiFi/fibre optic cables work... Prayers ending up in Gods ethereal inbox not so much.
Man can disprove travel beyond the speed of light, communications over the internet, are not possible without a modem, and network interconnect by sticking optical cable in your ear. Prayers not ending up in God's ethereal inbox not so much.
Perhaps some things are not subject to proof, or disproof?
These threads always devolve into one side believing the message delivered by Christ. They defend their position of faith relying upon what Christians believe to be the ultimate source of proof, the Bible. Through faith we believe, through faith we have eternal life.
The other side dismisses the Bible out of hand and mocks the teachings of Christ. They don’t view the Bible with reverence like Christians do. They laugh at it, they belittle it, they besmirch those that believe in it. They demand proof of faith in order to believe in faith. 😁 They demand an undefined threshold of proof that MY FAITH must meet in order for them to BELIEVE.
The other side has FAITH....our burden of proof has been met. It’s revealed in the Bible and in our personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It’s through that personal relationship, the experiences we have in our daily lives and with open hearts that we can see God’s hand in our lives. I can’t prove my experience to someone else nor can I prove what my personal relationship with someone is like, especially if they don’t care to hear about it. Just because I can’t prove what my relationship with someone is like doesn’t mean that relationship isn’t real or doesn’t exist.
What I don't understand about these threads is why every time one comes up, the same people line up to try to discredit others' faith. Why do they care what others believe? Believe what you want, but why the need to discredit someone else's beliefs? Why do they care, and why the need to try and "prove" something that can't be proven?
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
You are not correct. Faith is not as you say ….”a belief held without the support of evidence…..” That may be your thinking but it most certainly not biblical nor in line with basic Christian tenets.
In brief, here are the basics:
First, faith is “being sure of what hope for and certain of what we do not see.” Now, your natural mind will object and say that I am describing belief without any evidence for that belief. (see Hebrews 11:1)
Your dictionary may describe faith as simply as “belief in and devotion to God.” There is more to it than that.
So, second, faith is a gift….. a gift….. from God. He gives that faith to us. Yep, that simple. God gives us the faith to believe in Him and to be “certain” of what we do not see.
This is the “proof” that God provides to us and for us. (see Ephesians 2:8-9)
As had been referred to previously…. “…He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.” (see Hebrews 11:6)
Hebrews, if you understand the verse, supports what I said. It says exactly what I said, only more poetically. Faith is a sense of surety based on the things hoped for, faith is its own 'evidence' - which is not actually evidence in terms of verifiable information that anyone can access, ie, your reasons for believing in god is not based on objective evidence....hence the reason why your belief is classified as a matter of faith...faith is believing in things unseen and non detectable, the Hindu faith, Islamic faith, etc, etc...
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
What about your faith-? Its on display every time you post, yet you exempt it from your own critique.
Equivocation. If I point out what the essential definition of faith is, it is not my definition but the given definition as used in the English language. I am not making anything up., Blount used the recognized definition of faith back in the 1600's, as quoted. I can and do support what I say.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
Science cannot explain consciousness, my body could do all it does without me being self-aware inside it. Proof enough for me that what we see ain’t all there is.
Likewise I cannot recollect ever creating myself.
Mostly I’m very grateful for the life I have been given.
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
You are not correct. Faith is not as you say ….”a belief held without the support of evidence…..” That may be your thinking but it most certainly not biblical nor in line with basic Christian tenets.
In brief, here are the basics:
First, faith is “being sure of what hope for and certain of what we do not see.” Now, your natural mind will object and say that I am describing belief without any evidence for that belief. (see Hebrews 11:1)
Your dictionary may describe faith as simply as “belief in and devotion to God.” There is more to it than that.
So, second, faith is a gift….. a gift….. from God. He gives that faith to us. Yep, that simple. God gives us the faith to believe in Him and to be “certain” of what we do not see.
This is the “proof” that God provides to us and for us. (see Ephesians 2:8-9)
As had been referred to previously…. “…He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.” (see Hebrews 11:6)
Hebrews, if you understand the verse, supports what I said. It says exactly what I said, only more poetically. Faith is a sense of surety based on the things hoped for, faith is its own 'evidence' - which is not actually evidence in terms of verifiable information that anyone can access, ie, your reasons for believing in god is not based on objective evidence....hence the reason why your belief is classified as a matter of faith...faith is believing in things unseen and non detectable, the Hindu faith, Islamic faith, etc, etc...
Well, here again we have non-Christians telling Christians what the Bible teaches. Not uncommon.
Science cannot explain consciousness, my body could do all it does without me being self-aware inside it. Proof enough for me that what we see ain’t all there is. .
Android phones do a stack of things that the owners dont know the device is doing even when not actively using it... Most people still dont know precisely how that is possible.. And many still wouldnt really uderstand even if you explained the intracacies Of the tecnology to them.
A roofer was near the ridgeline of a large barn hammering in shingle nails when he slipped and started sliding inevitably toward the eve.
"Oh Lord Jesus save me please!" Just then his pants snagged upon a protruding nail and he abruptly stopped sliding. "Never mind Lord, the nail caught me."
I was carted along to Sabbath School every week during my formative years. I took Bible studies from several religious organizations and studied the Bible in College. Along the way I learned how many organized religions change their positions on doctrine with the times in order to keep the pews filled and the coffers full. I learned how various sects cling to one verse or chapter or even book of the Bible and use that segment to ignore other sections.
I remember a revelation when I was 12 years old. I was playing out in a 18 inch tall alfalfa field when I realized I had lost my one and only first ever pocket knife recently received as a birthday present. I was kneeling in the dirt and had not moved since I had the knife in my hand.
And I remember praying. "Show me my knife. Help me find it and I will believe forever" No, at that time, as a twelve year old child, I did not believe. I wondered, but did not know.
And eventually after bending over each bunch of alfalfa and straining the dirt through my fingers in a circle as large as I could have possibly dropped the knife. I did find it. I breathed a sigh of relief. And then I sat and thought about what had just happened.
Being a rational, rather than an emotional child, I concluded that it was my dedication to the search. A thorough and methodical sifting of the possible terrain in which it had been lost. There was no devine intervention.
This lead to a life of questions and doubt. Eventually, before I graduated High School, I concluded there was no evidence of any form of deity. Oh, yes, until my mid-twenties, I sat through Sabbath School. I read the lessons and could regurgitate all the proper answers. But it was no more than a mental exercise, and an opportunity to socialize with the young pretty single ladies.
From the time I was six years old, I had read mythology from many cultures, and I learned to recognize Judeo Christian stories to be equatable to Roman, Greek, Norse, and Arab mythology.
There is much wisdom in the Bible. To live by the laws of the Bible is to live cooperatively as a society. There is much real History recorded in the Bible, but it is mixed with the mythology of the oral traditions. And there is much in the Bible which is only there to perpetuate The Priesthood and keep the Priests fat, happy, and sometimes even well bedded.
None of the previous paragraph proves the existence of any god, or the deity of the man known as Jesus of Nazerath. It does prove the old Jewish priests were wise and calculating and had thousands of years to hone their stories for greatest effect.
So, to the OP. No, I do not believe prayer changes the odds in the outcome of any situation. I do not deny that their are beings in the Universe with higher abilities than I or with more knowledge than I. I do deny that such a being has any influence upon my life, nor knowledge of my existence. And that being must conform to the laws of physics, just as you and I must.
As I am experiencing Heaven right here on Earth in the present time. I have no need to believe in an afterlife. When the electrons quite flowing in the brain, consciousness fades, and that which makes us human rather than inanimate matter ceases to exist. We are done and gone, never to exist again.
What is the proof of this? What a ridiculous question. Of course no one has ever actually died, actual brain dead, total cessation of neural activity, and then told us what is on the other side.
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
What about your faith-? Its on display every time you post, yet you exempt it from your own critique.
Equivocation. If I point out what the essential definition of faith is, it is not my definition but the given definition as used in the English language. I am not making anything up., Blount used the recognized definition of faith back in the 1600's, as quoted. I can and do support what I say.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
Faith and knowledge are two entirely different things. Faith is a belief held without the support of verifiable evidence....while knowledge is a high degree of certainty built upon verifiable, objective evidence. We know, for example that the Sun, Moon and Stars exist, but take it on faith that a God or gods exist.
Two entirely different things.
When people testify, they are describing their subjective evaluation of what they believe happened, their interpretation of events, which needs to be verified using objective information., Which is why witness testimony is not always sufficient and at time notoriously unreliable.
Faith as a belief held without the support of evidence can prove true or false depending on whether actual evidence comes along. Then there is the matter of probability. How probably is it that Islam is correct, or Hinduisms Brahman, or Zeus living atop Mt Olympus.
"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)
You are not correct. Faith is not as you say ….”a belief held without the support of evidence…..” That may be your thinking but it most certainly not biblical nor in line with basic Christian tenets.
In brief, here are the basics:
First, faith is “being sure of what hope for and certain of what we do not see.” Now, your natural mind will object and say that I am describing belief without any evidence for that belief. (see Hebrews 11:1)
Your dictionary may describe faith as simply as “belief in and devotion to God.” There is more to it than that.
So, second, faith is a gift….. a gift….. from God. He gives that faith to us. Yep, that simple. God gives us the faith to believe in Him and to be “certain” of what we do not see.
This is the “proof” that God provides to us and for us. (see Ephesians 2:8-9)
As had been referred to previously…. “…He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.” (see Hebrews 11:6)
Hebrews, if you understand the verse, supports what I said. It says exactly what I said, only more poetically. Faith is a sense of surety based on the things hoped for, faith is its own 'evidence' - which is not actually evidence in terms of verifiable information that anyone can access, ie, your reasons for believing in god is not based on objective evidence....hence the reason why your belief is classified as a matter of faith...faith is believing in things unseen and non detectable, the Hindu faith, Islamic faith, etc, etc...
Well, here again we have non-Christians telling Christians what the Bible teaches. Not uncommon.
Oh well, go your own way, it seems right to you.
I am not teaching anyone anything by merely pointing out what is in the bible. The bible tells us that God creates evil, that God has a friendly wager with satan at the expense of much suffering and pain to family, servants and livestock, considered to be mere possessions of Job, that God drowned the whole world and cursed generations for the sins of the fathers, etc, etc.
It is not me making this stuff up or trying to teach anyone anything, just pointing out what is there for the sake of balance.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
I too am a critic of knowledge gained through faith.
Belief may be gained through faith. Belief is not knowledge. Many have faith and believe things which are demonstrably false. Many have faith and believe things which are contrary to the knowledge and beliefs of others.
Knowledge tells us only that one or both must be wrong.
Knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation of those observations.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
I too am a critic of knowledge gained through faith.
Belief may be gained through faith. Belief is not knowledge. Many have faith and believe things which are demonstrably false. Many have faith and believe things which are contrary to the knowledge and beliefs of others.
Knowledge tells us only that one or both must be wrong.
Knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation of those observations.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of the mind a belief (upon which all "knowledge" ultimately depends) is a belief held on the basis of faith.
Christians believe to be the ultimate source of proof, the Bible. The other side dismisses the Bible out of hand...They don’t view the Bible with reverence like Christians do.
Many nonbelievers attack Christianity by attacking the Bible. If someone gave up on Christianity because of something in the Bible or something about the Bible, they may have given up on Christianity unnecessarily. Even if someone is leaning towards the door and is about to leave Christianity because of something in the Bible or something about the Bible, they don’t have to leave. And here’s why that is - Jesus’ most devout first century followers never owned a Bible, never read a Bible...because there was no Bible to be had or read. But these men and women turned the world upside down; they’re the reason that people worship Jesus today; and they never held a Bible because there was no Bible until the fourth century. So what happened...? What did they believe...? What did they know...? Why is it that people are so quick to (and so easily persuaded to) walk away from faith because of a book that didn’t even exist when Christianity began...? How we talk about the Bible can be an obstacle. And what we point to as the foundation of our faith...for most Christians...unfortunately, is the Bible. We’ve been taught...unfortunately...that the Bible is the foundation of our faith. What served as the foundation of faith for the first century church...? We should take the cues about the foundation of our faith from those who were closest to the action...the first century, first followers of Jesus. What was the foundation of Peter’s faith; where did Peter get his hope; how is it that he was now walking around in the open - being bold and confident and preaching - whereas before, he was afraid and hid for his life...? The foundation of his faith was not something he’d read or had read to him. The foundation of his faith was what he’d seen. What should be the foundation of our faith...? What should be the center of our confidence...? Peter would say “that’s easy...the resurrection.” The foundation of our faith is not a book - it is an event. The Bible did not create Christianity. The Christians eventually created the Bible. The foundation of our faith is not a cleverly cobbled together group of manuscripts. Peter believed what he believed because of what he saw. He saw Jesus die, and later, he saw the risen Jesus. The resurrection is the foundation of the Christian faith.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
I too am a critic of knowledge gained through faith.
Belief may be gained through faith. Belief is not knowledge. Many have faith and believe things which are demonstrably false. Many have faith and believe things which are contrary to the knowledge and beliefs of others.
Knowledge tells us only that one or both must be wrong.
Knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation of those observations.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of the mind a belief (upon which all "knowledge" ultimately depends) is a belief held on the basis of faith.
That's not how it works. Though it is a fine example of equivocation.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of the mind a belief (upon which all "knowledge" ultimately depends) is a belief held on the basis of faith.
Spouting metaphysical garbage does not make it so. Obviously I can prove, to any reasonable observer, that I write a check. I can prove that when the electrical circuit is broken, the light goes out. That I am me is demonstrable. That is the very definition of imperical evidence. That which can be received by means of the senses. Particularly through observation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.
That which can be received by means of the senses is knowledge.
Faith is not gained through the senses. It is generated in the mind.
[/quote]Many nonbelievers attack Christianity by attacking the Bible. If someone gave up on Christianity because of something in the Bible or something about the Bible, they may have given up on Christianity unnecessarily. Even if someone is leaning towards the door and is about to leave Christianity because of something in the Bible or something about the Bible, they don’t have to leave. And here’s why that is - Jesus’ most devout first century followers never owned a Bible, never read a Bible...because there was no Bible to be had or read. But these men and women turned the world upside down; they’re the reason that people worship Jesus today; and they never held a Bible because there was no Bible until the fourth century. So what happened...? What did they believe...? What did they know...? Why is it that people are so quick to (and so easily persuaded to) walk away from faith because of a book that didn’t even exist when Christianity began...? How we talk about the Bible can be an obstacle. And what we point to as the foundation of our faith...for most Christians...unfortunately, is the Bible. We’ve been taught...unfortunately...that the Bible is the foundation of our faith. What served as the foundation of faith for the first century church...? We should take the cues about the foundation of our faith from those who were closest to the action...the first century, first followers of Jesus. What was the foundation of Peter’s faith; where did Peter get his hope; how is it that he was now walking around in the open - being bold and confident and preaching - whereas before, he was afraid and hid for his life...? The foundation of his faith was not something he’d read or had read to him. The foundation of his faith was what he’d seen. What should be the foundation of our faith...? What should be the center of our confidence...? Peter would say “that’s easy...the resurrection.” The foundation of our faith is not a book - it is an event. The Bible did not create Christianity. The Christians eventually created the Bible. The foundation of our faith is not a cleverly cobbled together group of manuscripts. Peter believed what he believed because of what he saw. He saw Jesus die, and later, he saw the risen Jesus. The resurrection is the foundation of our faith.[/quote]
Antlers, this is one of my favorite lines from your post.
[/quote] ...the Bible can be an obstacle. And what we point to as the foundation of our faith...for most Christians...unfortunately, is the Bible. We’ve been taught...unfortunately...that the Bible is the foundation of our faith. [/quote]
I feel sorry for you Ejp 1234. Hopefully you except God before you die!!!!
I know Him! I had a stroke in 2008. It was his through grace that I’m alive today that I can walk, talk, and think. Not always spell.😁.
But i am!!!!!!
Absolutely nothing to do with modern medicine?
Didn’t say that! But who do you think aloud man to make modern medicine!
Well, I feel sorry for you too Whelenman... not only can you not spell... though you admitted to it.
Gods will didn’t make your laptop thinner nor your fuel mileage better.
I think maybe you meant, "God's will...".
Wm has suffered a stroke. What's your problem? Oh yeah. Nevermind. Your stupidity problem is congenital.
You really do crack me up man. You have got to be the most miserable being I have ever cross paths with on the net. Literally, 90%+ of your posts are hate filled posts towards another poster, a politician, or a race in general.
Im very serious when I say, I suspect you walked in on your wife riding a black guy or getting spunk spewed on her face while in your own bed... maybe it was your daughter, I am not sure.... but I am sure something happened.
For a man who declares his devotion to Christ, constantly referring to various scriptures, you need to really reflect on life if you truly do seek salvation. I don’t believe, but I very much understand Christian beliefs... Believe or don’t, that is irrelevant in forming a firm opinion your one extremely emotionally challenged being (aka fugged up in the head). You better hope Texas never adopts a red flag law.
What served as the foundation of faith for the first century church...? We should take the cues about the foundation of our faith from those who were closest to the action...the first century, first followers of Jesus. What was the foundation of Peter’s faith; where did Peter get his hope; how is it that he was now walking around in the open - being bold and confident and preaching - whereas before, he was afraid and hid for his life...? The foundation of his faith was not something he’d read or had read to him. The foundation of his faith was what he’d seen. What should be the foundation of our faith...? What should be the center of our confidence...? Peter would say “that’s easy...the resurrection.” The foundation of our faith is not a book - it is an event. The Bible did not create Christianity. The Christians eventually created the Bible. The foundation of our faith is not a cleverly cobbled together group of manuscripts. Peter believed what he believed because of what he saw. He saw Jesus die, and later, he saw the risen Jesus. The resurrection is the foundation of the Christian faith.
Jesus drew people to Him. People from all different backgrounds were attracted to Jesus. Do ‘Christians’ nowadays draw people to Jesus...? Does the body of believers nowadays draw people to Jesus...? Do Jesus’ followers nowadays represent Jesus in a way that draws people from the onlooking world to Jesus...? So many of em’ seem to be angry about ‘sinners’ and happy about hell. Sin doesn’t make God angry...sin breaks God’s heart. Sin should break our hearts, because sin breaks people. If God so loved the world that He gave His son for it, then He is ‘for’ the world. That means that He’s against anything that’s not ‘for’ us. God’s against sin because God is ‘for’ us. How many times have we seen ‘Christians’ judge non-Christians for not acting like Christians...? Who would a ‘Christians expect a non-Christian to act like a Christian...? Why would a Christian be critical and berating to a non-Christian for not acting like a Christian...? The Apostle Paul said “what business is it of mine to judge those outside of the church...?” Why would a Christian judge outsiders for not embracing the values of something they’ve never signed up for in the first place...? We’re not supposed to judge outsiders...we’re supposed to love outsiders. Christians often drive others ‘away’ from Jesus. God spent hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years getting the world ready to send the ‘one person’ into this world that could pay for our sins. And all He requires from us is to acknowledge what He’s done for us...and then just live ‘that’.
Going back to the original post, I don't think this question can be answered.
A sick man gets well after someone prays for him. Is that because of the praying or would he have gotten well anyway?
Another sick man dies afer someone prays for him. Why? God's will?
I tend to feel that it makes no difference. However, here's what i really think: Prayer doesn't cost much and it may not work. But it might work. So if someone believes it works, why not let them?
Antlers, you're right. We all fall short and should do better. I can get by ok with those unfortunate enough to not believe and pray for them, traitors and subversives who support the destruction of our country and constitution our gifters fought and died to give us, not so much.
Speaking of who draws from all corners to him. Trump.
Science cannot explain consciousness, my body could do all it does without me being self-aware inside it. Proof enough for me that what we see ain’t all there is. .
Android phones do a stack of things that the owners dont know the device is doing even when not actively using it... Most people still dont know precisely how that is possible.. And many still wouldnt really uderstand even if you explained the intracacies Of the tecnology to them.
No, but it is all explainable in observable terms.
Consciousness is a personal quality not provable in anything else. For all I know YOU are merely a biological entity, no self-awarenes necessary.
Jesus drew people to Him. People from all different backgrounds were attracted to Jesus. Do ‘Christians’ nowadays draw people to Jesus...? Does the body of believers nowadays draw people to Jesus...?
I understand what you are saying, and I often see critics of Christianity make criticisms along those lines. Oftentimes, what the critics are condemning are defense tactics of Christians - defending their children from what are basically monsters. Take the homosexual lobby for instance - they don't want to be left alone, they want to create more opportunities for self gratification. Fact is, if you are teaching perversion to my kids, I'm coming after you! I don't care if someone is in the Church or not, they are dangerous and need to be neutralized.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
I too am a critic of knowledge gained through faith.
Belief may be gained through faith. Belief is not knowledge. Many have faith and believe things which are demonstrably false. Many have faith and believe things which are contrary to the knowledge and beliefs of others.
Knowledge tells us only that one or both must be wrong.
Knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation of those observations.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of the mind a belief (upon which all "knowledge" ultimately depends) is a belief held on the basis of faith.
That's not how it works. Though it is a fine example of equivocation.
There is nothing equivocal in the absolute necessity of faith as the beginning of all genuine knowledge. You yourself are dependent on and exercise "faith" every time you "think". The difference between you and the theists is they are at least intellectually honest about it.
Once again, it takes no faith, only observation to gain knowledge. I know the sky is blue, I can observe that. I know that alcohol and tobacco damage the body, I can observe that.
I believe that cessation of brain activity equates to death of the soul. I can not observe that, but have faith it is true.
So, you would have believed there were no organisms that could make to I'll in dirty water before microscopes were invented.
You could have called a witch doctor and drank a concoction of rat penises, bat saliva and toad skins if you got a bad enough fever and been in the crew that said your illness came from someone's curse rather than tained food or water?
A sick man gets well after someone prays for him. Is that because of the praying or would he have gotten well anyway?
Another sick man dies afer someone prays for him. Why? God's will?
I tend to feel that it makes no difference. However, here's what i really think: Prayer doesn't cost much and it may not work. But it might work. So if someone believes it works, why not let them?
[/quote] Why not let them? How could anyone possibly stop them? Prayers do not need to be audible to be effective.
LOL...Cite case law where a jury was hung when they couldnt decide if 'God forced' a murderers hand.
is there any case on record where motive for the crime was attributed to a verifiable God?
Originally Posted by nighthawk
Logic requires that you entertain any possibility, yea or nay, no matter how improbable, until proven (to your satisfaction) otherwise.
again cite case law where a jury has genuinely considered the 'viable possibility' as requirement of judicial process law, that a God may have in fact forced a mans hand.
Originally Posted by nighthawk
[quote]A jerk like you would say "Prove God Didnt" [quote]
What are you afraid of, that you can't?..
For people on murder charges that try to deflect reponsibilty for their actions by blaming a God
how woud you go about proving beyond reasonable doubt (in as you say a 'logical manner') that a real deal God forced the defendants hand?
Hiding behind the claim that 'faith is beyond proof' dont cut it in such matters.
your waffling birdbrain dumb ass would be laughed out of court even all the way down the steps of the courthouse..only place you can really push your inane crap is on the irrelevant CF hoping to find acceptance..and i doubt the more rational, learned, down to earth christians here support your view.
your responses wreak of desperate clutching of straws based on highly subjective belief stances.
We all know that science, philosophy and religion all have the same origin, don't we? I'm suprised that religion manages to persist as long as it has....
we should also note that religion and politics often rub shoulders for mutual gains, adopting like strategies...ie ": if we repeat the same unsubstantiated nonsense enough times it will make it true"
when you question them, they take the convenient defensive cop out victim status stance , that "you are attacking my faith".
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
I too am a critic of knowledge gained through faith.
Belief may be gained through faith. Belief is not knowledge. Many have faith and believe things which are demonstrably false. Many have faith and believe things which are contrary to the knowledge and beliefs of others.
Knowledge tells us only that one or both must be wrong.
Knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation of those observations.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of the mind a belief (upon which all "knowledge" ultimately depends) is a belief held on the basis of faith.
That's not how it works. Though it is a fine example of equivocation.
There is nothing equivocal in the absolute necessity of faith as the beginning of all genuine knowledge. You yourself are dependent on and exercise "faith" every time you "think". The difference between you and the theists is they are at least intellectually honest about it.
No, it is equivocation...our experience of the world and self begins with information acquired from the external world by our senses and brain....which is in turn being tested against the external world as we navigate our way through it. The tree or the wall is there to bar your path regardless of what you believe. If your senses are reliable, you negotiate your way through an environment that does not care about belief or faith.
In the OT, satan is fully under the control of god, the book of Job, etc.
True. satan can do nor more or less than his master has planned and permits.
if its not in Gods plan it aint possible!
Its Jesus not the devil, that is superintedant of hell,;
(Rev. 1:18), “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.”
Lucifer did not cast himself down to earth or even request it , God spared him and bestowed on him a lesser dominion. - Evil exists with the will of God.
God purposely created and appointed an archangel to betray him, he also purposely created all the other angels which rebelled in support of lucifer.
God also created a world with diposable pawns just so fallen lucifer would still have an out-post job with the "firm"...
fallen Lucifer was still permitted in heaven, while christians can only hope of seeing such.
Once again, it takes no faith, only observation to gain knowledge. I know the sky is blue, I can observe that. I know that alcohol and tobacco damage the body, I can observe that.
I believe that cessation of brain activity equates to death of the soul. I can not observe that, but have faith it is true.
Once again, it takes no faith, only observation to gain knowledge. I know the sky is blue, I can observe that. I know that alcohol and tobacco damage the body, I can observe that.
I believe that cessation of brain activity equates to death of the soul. I can not observe that, but have faith it is true.
Like when men decided the world was flat.
A false and hasty conclusion based on an inadequate understanding of the world on a larger scale than they could grasp at the time, which is faith.
Once again, it takes no faith, only observation to gain knowledge. I know the sky is blue, I can observe that. I know that alcohol and tobacco damage the body, I can observe that.
I believe that cessation of brain activity equates to death of the soul. I can not observe that, but have faith it is true.
Like when men decided the world was flat.
No, much more like when men observed the world was not flat.
Remember what happened to the first men to claim the earth was not flat, nor that the earth was the center of the universe. And who caused it to happen and called those statements heresy.
Scripture describes earth as a mere circle, the God who made it and dictated the Bible didnt realize through simple observation or other 'all knowing' means, that it is spherical.
Copernicus also put the cat amongst the pigeons by introducing his theory of Heliocentrism.
yet Catholic Fathers of the Church were in unanimous consent in regard to geocentrism as a matter of... faith.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
I too am a critic of knowledge gained through faith.
Belief may be gained through faith. Belief is not knowledge. Many have faith and believe things which are demonstrably false. Many have faith and believe things which are contrary to the knowledge and beliefs of others.
Knowledge tells us only that one or both must be wrong.
Knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation of those observations.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of the mind a belief (upon which all "knowledge" ultimately depends) is a belief held on the basis of faith.
That's not how it works. Though it is a fine example of equivocation.
There is nothing equivocal in the absolute necessity of faith as the beginning of all genuine knowledge. You yourself are dependent on and exercise "faith" every time you "think". The difference between you and the theists is they are at least intellectually honest about it.
No, it is equivocation...our experience of the world and self begins with information acquired from the external world by our senses and brain....which is in turn being tested against the external world as we navigate our way through it. The tree or the wall is there to bar your path regardless of what you believe. If your senses are reliable, you negotiate your way through an environment that does not care about belief or faith.
Except modern philosophy teaches us that genuine knowledge of the external world is impossible to have. You are an adherent of that philosophy but you patronize theism (in your claim to have genuine knowledge of the external world) without even knowing you are doing it! This is why you are like the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars!
LOL...Cite case law where a jury was hung when they couldnt decide if 'God forced' a murderers hand.
Starman's legal lesson for the day: Why the jury reaches a verdict (or hangs) is not recorded. The court may inquire or a juror may speak but the only thing that matters is yea, nay, or punt.
While "God told me" may be laughably considered as a moral defense show me where it constitutes a legal defense. Hint: Anyone with an IQ of a grape knows it doesn't.
Scripture describes earth as a mere circle, the God who made it and dictated the Bible didnt realize through simple observation or other 'all knowing' means, that it is spherical.
Copernicus also put the cat amongst the pigeons by introducing his theory of Heliocentrism.
yet Catholic Fathers of the Church were in unanimous consent in regard to geocentrism as a matter of... faith.
Argument of a very disingenuous person. In other words a troll.
You are a critic of the idea of obtaining knowledge through faith. That fact has been demonstrated on this site beyond any doubt (in numerous posts by you and conversations in which you've participated) . Yet you exempt yourself from the strictures of your own criticism because materialism (which you adhere to with near religious devotion) holds that the metaphysical freedom of the mind (the idea that the mind is actually free to apprehend truth) is an impossibility. In which case, truth is an impossibility and in which further case, it is nonsense to even employ language for any purpose. (This is the quintessence of nihilism). The only way to escape this conundrum is to deny the truth of materialism (which you refuse to do) while incessantly talking as if truth is a genuine possibility and while simultaneously while slavishly following a philosophy that denies that there is any such thing as truth. You are therefore very much like that Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars.
I too am a critic of knowledge gained through faith.
Belief may be gained through faith. Belief is not knowledge. Many have faith and believe things which are demonstrably false. Many have faith and believe things which are contrary to the knowledge and beliefs of others.
Knowledge tells us only that one or both must be wrong.
Knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation of those observations.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of the mind a belief (upon which all "knowledge" ultimately depends) is a belief held on the basis of faith.
That's not how it works. Though it is a fine example of equivocation.
There is nothing equivocal in the absolute necessity of faith as the beginning of all genuine knowledge. You yourself are dependent on and exercise "faith" every time you "think". The difference between you and the theists is they are at least intellectually honest about it.
No, it is equivocation...our experience of the world and self begins with information acquired from the external world by our senses and brain....which is in turn being tested against the external world as we navigate our way through it. The tree or the wall is there to bar your path regardless of what you believe. If your senses are reliable, you negotiate your way through an environment that does not care about belief or faith.
Except modern philosophy teaches us that genuine knowledge of the external world is impossible to have. You are an adherent of that philosophy but you patronize theism (in your claim to have genuine knowledge of the external world) without even knowing you are doing it! This is why you are like the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars!
Without the knowledge of the world you have acquired from the moment of birth you would not last long, death by drowning while trying to walk on water, perhaps killed by traffic because road rules also cannot be known...maybe burnt because it's impossible to understand the properties of fire, etc, etc. Philosophy without science is an empty shell, how many Angels can dance on a needle point?
Scripture describes earth as a mere circle, the God who made it and dictated the Bible didnt realize through simple observation or other 'all knowing' means, that it is spherical.
Copernicus also put the cat amongst the pigeons by introducing his theory of Heliocentrism.
yet Catholic Fathers of the Church were in unanimous consent in regard to geocentrism as a matter of... faith.
Argument of a very disingenuous person. In other words a troll.
That's a value judgment, not a refutation of what was said.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of
Except modern philosophy teaches us that genuine knowledge of the external world is impossible to have. You are an adherent of that philosophy but you patronize theism (in your claim to have genuine knowledge of the external world) without even knowing you are doing it! This is why you are like the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars!
Man, that is some new age hippy BS!
It is time to toss those Philosophy texts and buy some Physics texts.
We already addressed the concept of empirical evidence. Any high school graduate who mastered his Biology, Chemistry, and Physics courses knows how to observe his surroundings.
What made high school graduates? Oh yeah. An explosion of gases of elements. What made elements and gasses? Oh yeah. They just were. Oh yeah. Then there was just the heavens and earth.
Well, we cant prove He didnt do it, but since we cant prove He did, then we know He didnt.
Now doesnt that just make perfect scientific sense?
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of
Except modern philosophy teaches us that genuine knowledge of the external world is impossible to have. You are an adherent of that philosophy but you patronize theism (in your claim to have genuine knowledge of the external world) without even knowing you are doing it! This is why you are like the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars!
Man, that is some new age hippy BS!
It is time to toss those Philosophy texts and buy some Physics texts.
We already addressed the concept of empirical evidence. Any high school graduate who mastered his Biology, Chemistry, and Physics courses knows how to observe his surroundings.
No, that is classic enlightenment philosophy of which you are apparently entirely ignorant.
It is time to toss those Philosophy texts and buy some Physics texts.
We already addressed the concept of empirical evidence. Any high school graduate who mastered his Biology, Chemistry, and Physics courses knows how to observe his surroundings.
No, that is classic enlightenment philosophy of which you are apparently entirely ignorant.
If that is enlightenment, I am grateful to live in the dark.
I would rather take my cues from Salk, Pasteur, Einstein, Hawking, Fermi, Plank and Avogadro.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of
Except modern philosophy teaches us that genuine knowledge of the external world is impossible to have. You are an adherent of that philosophy but you patronize theism (in your claim to have genuine knowledge of the external world) without even knowing you are doing it! This is why you are like the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars!
Man, that is some new age hippy BS!
It is time to toss those Philosophy texts and buy some Physics texts.
We already addressed the concept of empirical evidence. Any high school graduate who mastered his Biology, Chemistry, and Physics courses knows how to observe his surroundings.
No, that is classic enlightenment philosophy of which you are apparently entirely ignorant.
That's merely a claim. You need to support it by showing how philosophy alone gives us greater understanding of the natural world. No telescopes, microscopes, colliders, calculus, etc, etc....just pure philosophy.
Let's see what a world renown philosopher has to say on the subject, for all practical purposes, exactly what I said earlier:
Hume warned against reasoning too far removed from the real world: if we reason a priori, anything may appear to produce anything. The falling of a pebble may, for aught we know, extinguish the sun; or the wish of man control the planets in their orbits.
It is only experience, which teaches us the nature of cause and effect, and enables us to infer the existence of one object from that of another.'' David Hume.
''I shall say that I know with certainty that he is not to put his hand into the fire and hold it there till it be consumed: And this event, I think I can foretell with the same assurance, as that, if he throw himself out at the window, and meet with no obstruction, he will not remain a moment suspended in the air.'' (David Hume, 1737)
Yep, a bunch of self aggrandizing old fugs sitting around smoking stogies and sippin' bourbon. Just thinking about thinking and congratulating each other on their latest pronouncements.
And none of them ever contributing one wit toward the betterment of humanity.
[That's a value judgment, not a refutation of what was said.
Either he's disingenuous or dumb as a box of rocks if he's truly propounding that "argument." An intelligent 5th grader should be able to blow that one away.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of
Except modern philosophy teaches us that genuine knowledge of the external world is impossible to have. You are an adherent of that philosophy but you patronize theism (in your claim to have genuine knowledge of the external world) without even knowing you are doing it! This is why you are like the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars!
Man, that is some new age hippy BS!
It is time to toss those Philosophy texts and buy some Physics texts.
We already addressed the concept of empirical evidence. Any high school graduate who mastered his Biology, Chemistry, and Physics courses knows how to observe his surroundings.
It's only a basis of Ontology. Prove that you exist. In Trekkie terms how do you know that you, and all around you including all of physics, isn't a few lines of code in some alien simulation. If you can't prove that you exist using logic than you can't prove anything.
And new age hippy BS? It come from only about 300 BC.
[That's a value judgment, not a refutation of what was said.
Either he's disingenuous or dumb as a box of rocks if he's truly propounding that "argument." An intelligent 5th grader should be able to blow that one away.
Well then, instead of all the huffing and puffing and displays of outrage, that should be done. Saying is not the same as doing.
Can you prove that you are the person who writes checks in your name? The very idea (the assumption) that you are you is an idea held on the basis of "faith". It cannot, in the final analysis, be empirically demonstrated. Likewise, the belief in the metaphysical freedom of
Except modern philosophy teaches us that genuine knowledge of the external world is impossible to have. You are an adherent of that philosophy but you patronize theism (in your claim to have genuine knowledge of the external world) without even knowing you are doing it! This is why you are like the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars!
Man, that is some new age hippy BS!
It is time to toss those Philosophy texts and buy some Physics texts.
We already addressed the concept of empirical evidence. Any high school graduate who mastered his Biology, Chemistry, and Physics courses knows how to observe his surroundings.
It's only a basis of Ontology. Prove that you exist. In Trekkie terms how do you know that you, and all around you including all of physics, isn't a few lines of code in some alien simulation. If you can't prove that you exist using logic than you can't prove anything.
And new age hippy BS? It come from only about 300 BC.
Classic circular argument. You have to presume you exist before you can state that you think. Try again.
No need, in order to think one must necessarily exist. Something that does not exist, cannot think. Not everything that is circular is a fallacy....Google that and stick it in your pipe.
You're not thinking, it's all programmed into the simulation.
That is a fallacy...why you ask? Well, because even a simulation is something rather than nothing. Once it is established that something rather than nothing exists - cogito ergo sum - it's only a matter of exploring what that something might be.
A simulation is not a single independent being capable of rational thought, what the ancient Greeks thought of as a person, and has persisted as a basis of Western thought.
So a simulation exists, is it capable of thought? There was a computer program called Eliza. It was written to give responses similar to what a psychoanalyst might give. A sizable proportion of users would become so entranced by the responses they would tell their deepest secrets to the computer. Eliza - Cogito ergo sum.?
So we're back to
I think (which presupposes that there is something capable of thinking) Therefore I am (Which we had to presuppose to assert "I think" as a truth
Which is not a proof but a restatement of the presupposition. And that, strangely enough, is the solution to the riddle. We cannot prove we exist, it must be an a priori, before anything else, assumed that we exist (as independent beings capable of rational thought). Not so horrible an assumption, I don't think you would find many who would disagree with it.
A simulation is not a single independent being capable of rational thought, what the ancient Greeks thought of as a person, and has persisted as a basis of Western thought.
So a simulation exists, is it capable of thought? There was a computer program called Eliza. It was written to give responses similar to what a psychoanalyst might give. A sizable proportion of users would become so entranced by the responses they would tell their deepest secrets to the computer. Eliza - Cogito ergo sum.?
So we're back to
I think (which presupposes that there is something capable of thinking) Therefore I am (Which we had to presuppose to assert "I think" as a truth
Which is not a proof but a restatement of the presupposition. And that, strangely enough, is the solution to the riddle. We cannot prove we exist, it must be an a priori, before anything else, assumed that we exist (as independent beings capable of rational thought). Not so horrible a proposition, I don't think you would find many who would disagree with it.
A simulation, if sufficiently complex may have characters with independent processors/brains, senses and algorithms that enable decision making....some propose that our universe could be one of countless quantum simulations being generated by super advanced civilizations.
Which, if true, is still something rather than nothing.
I have written simulations. They all follow rules (algorithms) that I have dictated by my code, they are capable of nothing more. They are not independent but extensions of myself which would be unnecessary if I could do simple transformations that fast.
I have written simulations. They all follow rules (algorithms) that I have dictated by my code, they are capable of nothing more. They are not independent but extensions of myself which would be unnecessary if I could do simple transformations that fast.
Nobody is talking about current technology, current processing power or current capability. Think quantum computing and a few thousand years of technological .progress
Yesterday I was at a business lunch, my forehead started beading up, and my gut had the unmistakable crampy feeling... last nights dinner showed up to kick my ass....
I knew I had to run the to mens room... but I had to rush through it as I didnt want my clients to think anything other than I was taking a leak...
I prayed to god, I prayed to jesus...
He answered my prayers... I got it done in two quick pushes, little watery, but made for a quicker clean up... which put me back at that table in about 2min’s...
Why the jury reaches a verdict (or hangs) is not recorded. The court may inquire or a juror may speak but the only thing that matters is yea, nay, or punt.
When a judge instructs a jury to further deliberate on a matter, details of such instruction are indeed noted and recorded. Thus we can know what particular issue of deliberation they are hung.
IE] : its not a secret as to what counts a jury can be hung, and on the basis of which a judge can subsequently Declare a mistrial.
Originally Posted by nighthawk
While "God told me" may be laughably considered as a moral defense show me where it constitutes a legal defense. Hint: Anyone with an IQ of a grape knows it doesn't.
Would citing case law convince you that US courts do accept the' God made me do it' as ones legal defence argument?
2012, defendant Renato Seabra had his attorneys tell a Manhattan jury just that.
Sinins and Touger told the jury that Seabra believed he was on a mission from God and that his murderous actions were a sort of exorcism.
The jury did not buy the God defence or even insanity as the cause.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
... .. if he's truly propounding that "argument." An intelligent 5th grader should be able to blow that one away.
Well then, instead of all the huffing and puffing and displays of outrage, that should be done. Saying is not the same as doing.
Nitebirdy is all catholic smoke and mirrors, scant logical, rational objective substance.
His waffling arguments are so often and all so easily proven wrong. [yawn]
He avoids questions like i posed ealier,. Because its bring into serious question the value or validity of faith in a version of a God of their own subjective mind making.
Quote
is there any case on record where motive for the crime was attributed to a verifiable God?
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
It has also been interpreted s Jesus telling his disciples that his teachings are for Jews only, and they should not try to convert gentiles.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
It has also been interpreted s Jesus telling his disciples that his teachings are for Jews only, and they should not try to convert gentiles.
Except that Jesus came to save everyone, not just Jews, If anyone ever lived that it was Jesus so that interpretation makes zero sense.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
It has also been interpreted s Jesus telling his disciples that his teachings are for Jews only, and they should not try to convert gentiles.
Pretty sure He chose the Jews to deliver the Good News to the world.
They only wanted Him to stomp the Roman's of Babylon into the dirt.
He disappointed them so they rejected Him. So they are still waiting on Him to come and stomp them.
Pretty stiffnecked group, as He said, I guess, since He had King Cyrus do it ages ago.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
That's one aspect to it. The other aspect being what I said. It can be both, unintended consequences, etc.
can you prove Aquinas didn't levitate or do you just ass-u-me he didn't,..
Murderers claiming a God forced their hand or Aquinas claiming levitation through the gifted power of his God and folks like you that claim a Jesus really did raise to life from a 3 day old corpse and then ascend into the clouds..
Are all in the same wacky boat... In that the onus is on the claimants to prove such, not others disprove such.
None are anymore provable than the other.
Courts do not automatically buy the story 'a God made me do it' puting the onus on the prosecution to prove otherwise. - Prosecutors need only prove intent, for motives (or what one was thinking or believing) are subjective.
Defendants claiming someone else is to directly blame for A crime, are required to substantiate that other allegedly Involved party actually exists [no faith based phantoms] and then prove they were involved in just such a way as they claim.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
That's one aspect to it. The other aspect being what I said. It can be both, unintended consequences, etc.
It's pretty easy to tell who is genuinely interested in the topic, or who is just here to antagonize, argue, ridicule, etc. The same cast of fools always show up on any thread related to Christianity.
Unless Matthew was actually talking about Dogs and Swine, it's a just another classic display of arrogance and intolerance by the religeously "gifted" to relegate non-believers to sub-scum category.
That's why I like to respond to religious threads. One day you'll see the truth.
Well good - I already know the truth. Sounds like you might be wising up to it too, still if you don't realise the truth before you die, no consequence.
...it's a just another classic display of arrogance and intolerance by the religeously "gifted" to relegate non-believers to sub-scum category.
Religious (Christian) rules or laws or commandments or beliefs should NEVER get in the way of compassion. There’s been a lot of victims of this; people interpret the Bible and and use it in such a way so as to withhold compassion, or worse, to actually mistreat another person or other people. Modern day Pharisees get so focused on what the Bible says that they lose sight of who the Bible is for. They lose sight of to who the Bible is written and for what. They get so focused on the speck in somebody else’s eye, or in some cases a whole group of people’s eyes, that they can’t see the log in their own eye.
Well good - I already know the truth. Sounds like you might be wising up to it too, still if you don't realise the truth before you die, no consequence.
Unless Matthew was actually talking about Dogs and Swine, it's a just another classic display of arrogance and intolerance by the religeously "gifted" to relegate non-believers to sub-scum category.
That's why I like to respond to religious threads. One day you'll see the truth.
Yep, and He will set us free, from death. If it were not so, He would not have told us so. I mean, WTH you think He gets out of it? Untold wealth and riches? Girlfriends? His Son back?
Come on, tell me, what's in it for Him? Reelection like Zero got? You cant figure your way out of a wet paper bag in the dark with both hands and a flashlight, but you want to explain truth to us?
Come on, give us truth on how life started, while the smartest scientists on earth that have you fooled cant do it.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
That's one aspect to it. The other aspect being what I said. It can be both, unintended consequences, etc.
It's pretty easy to tell who is genuinely interested in the topic, or who is just here to antagonize, argue, ridicule, etc. The same cast of fools always show up on any thread related to Christianity.
Some may be just pointing out apparent inconsistencies and contradictions, as you normally would when claims are being made, yet some dismissed this as trouble making or ridicule. The verse ''casting pearls before swine'' then becomes a means of defense.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
That's one aspect to it. The other aspect being what I said. It can be both, unintended consequences, etc.
It's pretty easy to tell who is genuinely interested in the topic, or who is just here to antagonize, argue, ridicule, etc. The same cast of fools always show up on any thread related to Christianity.
Some may be just pointing out apparent inconsistencies and contradictions, as you normally would when claims are being made, yet some dismissed this as trouble making or ridicule. The verse ''casting pearls before swine'' then becomes a means of defense.
Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Faith commeth by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
A grain of mustard seed of faith can move mountains.
It takes faith, faith in Gods word. If you pray for something against Gods word, he won't answer it. Jesus taught us how to get things by faith, but it is up to us to pray and believe. If you don't believe it won't happen. If there is any doubt and unbelief present during prayer, it blocks the answer.
6 “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
A verse that tends to discourage reasonable discussion, questioning and healthy skepticism. Unless they are private, therefore nobody else's business, assumptions and beliefs are open to question.
It's pretty simple........Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.
That's one aspect to it. The other aspect being what I said. It can be both, unintended consequences, etc.
It's pretty easy to tell who is genuinely interested in the topic, or who is just here to antagonize, argue, ridicule, etc. The same cast of fools always show up on any thread related to Christianity.
Some may be just pointing out apparent inconsistencies and contradictions, as you normally would when claims are being made, yet some dismissed this as trouble making or ridicule. The verse ''casting pearls before swine'' then becomes a means of defense.
We'll agree to disagree then.
That's fair enough.
We don't have to agree. Yet something is either true or false regardless of whether we or anyone else happens to agree or disagree.
The physical world doesn't care in the slightest about who agrees or disagrees, or what they believe.
The World is what it is regardless of any of our beliefs.
You may have your beliefs about God, but what you believe about GOD IS false.
HE said we can look around and see HIS handiwork. HE is right. Many of us can.
HE said HE has put scales on the eyes of many. Many of us can see that HE has.
HE says men lie. We see that's true, especially with regard to people like you.
HE was so smart to make it where we could not Prove HE exists. Otherwise people would prove it to you, then HIS word saying you have to have faith would not be true.
Bye, coffee is ready.
I see why HE said not to cast Pearl's to swine. You're a dumbass, too. I'll prove that too, later.
The last two posts from jag, on a thread about god and faith...
His posts are littered with personal insults, when not warranted as no one was personally lashing out at him...
Typically I would giggle at that....
But on a faith based thread, where non believers point out how we view a lot of christians.... this here is a prime example. Jag is the quintessential christian to what we have been describing, filled with hate and he despises anyone who sees or thinks differently, where as the true christian message is too love your fellow man in the name of god.
If there is such a place, which I do not believe, I would say most of the non believers would be granted access well before Mr. Rage. If what you say is true, since I dont believe... I guess I’ll be seeing you...
The last two posts from jag, on a thread about god and faith...
His posts are littered with personal insults, when not warranted as no one was personally lashing out at him...
Typically I would giggle at that....
But on a faith based thread, where non believers point out how we view a lot of christians.... this here is a prime example. Jag is the quintessential christian to what we have been describing, filled with hate and he despises anyone who sees or thinks differently, where as the true christian message is too love your fellow man in the name of god.
If there is such a place, which I do not believe, I would say most of the non believers would be granted access well before Mr. Rage. If what you say is true, since I dont believe... I guess I’ll be seeing you...
You're a lying dumbassed sucker, too.
I'm tired from a hard crane hunt this morning so I'll explain it later, though you're too stupid to comprehend, just like your bud Schumer is up now crying about the Senate not wanting to investigate Trump, too stupid to understand the Senate is to vote on the articles sent over by the house, though he had that explained to him also.
Ha, Schifty says the evidence against Trump is overwhelming. They are both, like you, too stupid to realize if the evidence is overwhelming, they dont really need to investigate for more evidence.
And, like you, they are too stupid to understand the articles they passed are not illegalities. They show no crime, much less high crimes. Or, maybe they do understand and, like you, just willfully elect to lie.
The last two posts from jag, on a thread about god and faith...
His posts are littered with personal insults, when not warranted as no one was personally lashing out at him...
Typically I would giggle at that....
But on a faith based thread, where non believers point out how we view a lot of christians.... this here is a prime example. Jag is the quintessential christian to what we have been describing, filled with hate and he despises anyone who sees or thinks differently, where as the true christian message is too love your fellow man in the name of god.
If there is such a place, which I do not believe, I would say most of the non believers would be granted access well before Mr. Rage. If what you say is true, since I dont believe... I guess I’ll be seeing you...
You're a lying dumbassed sucker, too.
I'm tired from a hard crane hunt this morning so I'll explain it later, though you're too stupid to comprehend, just like your bud Schumer is up now crying about the Senate not wanting to investigate Trump, too stupid to understand the Senate is to vote on the articles sent over by the house, though he had that explained to him also.
Ha, Schifty says the evidence against Trump is overwhelming. They are both, like you, too stupid to realize if the evidence is overwhelming, they dont really need to investigate for more evidence.
And, like you, they are too stupid to understand the articles they passed are not illegalities. They show no crime, much less high crimes. Or, maybe they do understand and, like you, just willfully elect to lie.
EJP, you said it very well. As a "Christian", jaq is a fake and a fraud. Plain and simple.
What's funny, Ejp is that you dont have to be stupid like DBT. You dont have scales on your eyes. You elect to be stupid.
Anger, intolerance at being questioned, lashing out in your frustration and inability to engage rationally, logically and impersonally. Sort of like reactionary Muslims do, only in a milder internet form. You don't do Christianity any credit.
Well, guys like dbt and Ejp essentially hold that since we cant prove God exists, they are right and there is no God. They are too stupid to realize there are lots of truths that exist and have yet to be scientifically proven. Then, they are stupid enough to think they can convince Christians to accept that. The suckers dont know how many hairs are on their ass and they think they can convince us there is no God. That's pretty stupid.
They are too stupid to believe truthful people who say they know Christ because they have a personal relationship with the Lord but yet they believe in people like Hillary and Zero. Stoooopid.
Suckers dont know up from down and expect Christian's to believe them. Stooopid.
They cant disprove God but that's ok, they "know" HE doesnt exist but if Christians cant prove God exists
what they know is worthless.
Like I say, I dont think one of you unbelievers knows up from down. Any of you who want to try to prove me wrong is welcome to try.
You stupid suckers crow saying I am not a Christian when you dont believe in God. Ha. There can be no Christian's if there is no God.
You just admitted there are Christian's, which is to admit there is God. To Christians, there is God. Doesnt matter if they can prove Him to you. Christian's have a relationship with God. They can not have a relationship with something nonexistent.
Now, if there were no God and they thought there was, they could be wannabe Christian's and you could ridicule wannabe Christian's, but they wouldnt really be Christian's. You have already admitted with your mouth there are Christian's.
Valsdad, show me what good is if there is no God.
Ejp, show me what up is.
There are a lot of people on this earth who never believed in God but had miserable lives until asking Him into their heart. They know He changed them. There are people like the pilot who saw a UFO, yet because many on this earth haven't, they believe they dont exist. They think that decorated officer is a liar. You know, a liar thinks others are liars like them and believe the liar and not the honest, just like the liars believe Zero but not Trump.
I pray for you liars because HE tells me to pray for my enemies. I'd just as soon you liars dont ever know Him.
Gee, I'm not a Christian I guess because I fall short and sin. Yeah, you better not be a believer. Then you too would be a sinner. Better to go to Hell than be a sinner.
Well, guys like dbt and Ejp essentially hold that since we cant prove God exists, they are right and there is no God. They are too stupid to realize there are lots of truths that exist and have yet to be scientifically proven. Then, they are stupid enough to think they can convince Christians to accept that. The suckers dont know how many hairs are on their ass and they think they can convince us there is no God. That's pretty stupid.
They are too stupid to believe truthful people who say they know Christ because they have a personal relationship with the Lord but yet they believe in people like Hillary and Zero. Stoooopid.
Suckers dont know up from down and expect Christian's to believe them. Stooopid.
They cant disprove God but that's ok, they "know" HE doesnt exist but if Christians cant prove God exists
what they know is worthless.
Like I say, I dont think one of you unbelievers knows up from down. Any of you who want to try to prove me wrong is welcome to try.
You stupid suckers crow saying I am not a Christian when you dont believe in God. Ha. There can be no Christian's if there is no God.
You just admitted there are Christian's, which is to admit there is God. To Christians, there is God. Doesnt matter if they can prove Him to you. Christian's have a relationship with God. They can not have a relationship with something nonexistent.
Now, if there were no God and they thought there was, they could be wannabe Christian's and you could ridicule wannabe Christian's, but they wouldnt really be Christian's. You have already admitted with your mouth there are Christian's.
Valsdad, show me what good is if there is no God.
Ejp, show me what up is.
There are a lot of people on this earth who never believed in God but had miserable lives until asking Him into their heart. They know He changed them. There are people like the pilot who saw a UFO, yet because many on this earth haven't, they believe they dont exist. They think that decorated officer is a liar. You know, a liar thinks others are liars like them and believe the liar and not the honest, just like the liars believe Zero but not Trump.
I pray for you liars because HE tells me to pray for my enemies. I'd just as soon you liars dont ever know Him.
Gee, I'm not a Christian I guess because I fall short and sin. Yeah, you better not be a believer. Then you too would be a sinner. Better to go to Hell than be a sinner.
The problem isn't so much your profession of Christian piety. Its that you're such an obvious fraud that makes you objectionable.
PS., Thank you LORD for answering my prayer, and those of millions of other believers, and putting Trump in office even against 1 in 100 odds including over the rigged voting machines, crooked previous IRS, potus, Hillary, MSM, DOJ, NSA, FBI, CIA, Australia, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, EPA, Dept of State, Ukraine, Russia, Teachers Union, UAW, UMW,......
PS., Thank you LORD for answering my prayer, and those of millions of other believers, and putting Trump in office even against 1 in 100 odds including over the rigged voting machines, crooked previous IRS, potus, Hillary, MSM, DOJ, NSA, FBI, CIA, Australia, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, EPA, Dept of State, Ukraine, Russia, Teachers Union, UAW, UMW,......
They said that about Jesus and Christopher Columbus.
Come on Tarq, educate me on up and down.
Oh, you can see how Trump got elected now cant you? You just couldnt see how before it happened now could you. Sorry, gotta go clean some ducks and crane.
They said that about Jesus and Christopher Columbus.
Come on Tarq, educate me on up and down.
Oh, you can see how Trump got elected now cant you? You just couldnt see how before it happened now could you. Sorry, gotta go clean some ducks and crane.
Well, I know Dr. Jag for having met him personally, bird hunting a few times, not "meeting" him via the airwaves. I know him to be very smart (he's a DOCTOR), reliable, trustworthy, and very knowledgeable about lots of subjects. He knows his way around shooting a shotgun too, big time. Does he have flaws? Of course.....he's human, and all humans have flaws, Christian humans included.
Using logic and common sense seems to be a waste of time.
I used to have sympathy for the believers (I thought that there was something wrong with a person who had faith) but now am convinced that the foundation for a true believer is arrogance driven by fear leading to discrimination, intolerance, hatred etc - sourcing the sins that it is intented to protect against. True believers would have learned their lesson and would have stopped sinning - not continue and then whinging, opps...I meant praying.., to god for forgiveness.
A lot of the smartest religious experts at the time of Jesus couldnt understand Him.
I admit I'm a poor work in progress and a poor example. The unbelievers think the nice talking believers are stupid and those who dont talk so nice are crazy.
There are some real high IQ atheists out there who know the Bible real well, yet dont see themselves as making the mistake of learning on their own understanding.
They are so smart and know the Bible well, yet they have the inability to understand His words when He said, you can look around you and see when spring time is coming, the buds on the fig tree...
Well, the buds are on the fig tree.
Yet, they cant, because of the scales on their eyes. He told them, yet they persist in their unbelief when all they have to do is test Him (He is not yet their God) and ask Him to come into their heart.
If they did, HE would, and they would see. It's as if they dont want to see. They would rather keep their head in the sand and proclaim others crazy.
I love watching an old kook put that much effort into defending himself by lashing out at others...
Jag is a prime example of digital low self esteem...
I also love reading his ridiculous rants about people being stupid because we cant prove something doesnt exist.... that has never ever been recorded as being physically seen or experienced hahahaha
Yeah.... we need to prove it to you hahahaha
Go back to ranting and raving, calling other people stupid and other various elementary insults Mr. Doctor hahaha...
Using logic and common sense seems to be a waste of time.
I used to have sympathy for the believers (I thought that there was something wrong with a person who had faith) but now am convinced that the foundation for a true believer is arrogance driven by fear leading to discrimination, intolerance, hatred etc - sourcing the sins that it is intented to protect against. True believers would have learned their lesson and would have stopped sinning - not continue and then whinging, opps...I meant praying.., to god for forgiveness.
Ignorance on parade.......
Romans 3: 9 What shall we conclude then? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. 10 As it is written:“There is no one righteous, not even one
Jeremiah 17:9 (ESV)
9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?
Using logic and common sense seems to be a waste of time.
I used to have sympathy for the believers (I thought that there was something wrong with a person who had faith) but now am convinced that the foundation for a true believer is arrogance driven by fear leading to discrimination, intolerance, hatred etc - sourcing the sins that it is intented to protect against. True believers would have learned their lesson and would have stopped sinning - not continue and then whinging, opps...I meant praying.., to god for forgiveness.
I respectfully beg to differ. I agree many religious people display the negative traits you mention, (Exhibit A: our own Jag-off) but I've met more than a few who do not. Everyone of us has a belief system based on faith, including so called "rationalists" such as DBT and virtually every atheist on the planet. Religious folk are at least willing to admit the primacy of faith in their belief system, whereas materialists and atheists generally deny their reliance on faith (and I'm not talking sectarian faith here) even though the necessity of a certain kid of faith to their belief system is so obvious and axiomatic. The problem with people like Jag is that they are such obvious fakes and frauds. A person who purports to be religious who is sincere in their belief and strives to act consistent with it is generally an admirable person. Its the one's that wear it on their sleeves while spouting racism, out and out idiocy and dropping F-bombs left and right (like Jag-off) that are off-putting.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
And you have faith in your own metaphysics, all evidence to the contrary.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
You can't see gravity, but you know it exists because you can see and feel its effects.
Originally Posted by DBT
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
Following Jesus isn’t ‘exclusively’ having faith in the teachings of a religion. For some, it’s having a vibrant, living relationship with a living, resurrected savior. For some, ‘religion’ has nuthin’ to do with it.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
Psalm 19
1 The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. 2 Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. 3 They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. 4 Yet their voice[b] goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world. In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun. 5 It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. 6 It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is deprived of its warmth.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
And you have faith in your own metaphysics, all evidence to the contrary.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
And you have faith in your own metaphysics, all evidence to the contrary.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
Psalm 19
1 The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. 2 Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. 3 They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. 4 Yet their voice[b] goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world. In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun. 5 It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. 6 It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is deprived of its warmth.
Hindus can quote from their own sacred writings, but what they say is not the same as quoting from the bible.
Something that has no evidence for its existence may prove to exist if evidence comes to light, or may not, but up until that point of evidence being presented, being certain of its existence is not a justified belief, it is a matter of faith.
Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, have faith in the teachings of their religion.
And you have faith in your own metaphysics, all evidence to the contrary.
I have wondered about the mocking naysayers who show up like clockwork on these Christian themed threads. Even though they profess to be atheists, agnostics or some other form of unbeliever, something is amiss… even disingenuous…. seems to me that there is a piece or missing.
I find it difficult to believe that these naysayers have no belief in God and certainly no belief in Jesus.
Then another angle or factor presented itself…..
The key motivator …..to their ongoing disparagement of Jesus …..may be that at some level they truly do want to believe but are wracked with pride, anxiety and doubt…. they disparage something that has proven unattainable…. they criticize and disparage what they really do desire …..but have not…. at least yet….. not yet obtained.
They hear the testimonies…. they hear about God… they hear about peace….. they hear about a greater power….. but they do not have it and yet … it seems to me....wish they did.
So, they disparage what they desire but cannot obtain…… this is old fashioned sour grapes.
Seems that God honors those who seek Him with reverent fear and perhaps even humility….
Those that clamor for a God that will serve them and be the god they want in their own hearts may remain disgruntled like the fox who could not reach the grapes.
Using logic and common sense seems to be a waste of time.
I used to have sympathy for the believers (I thought that there was something wrong with a person who had faith) but now am convinced that the foundation for a true believer is arrogance driven by fear leading to discrimination, intolerance, hatred etc - sourcing the sins that it is intented to protect against. True believers would have learned their lesson and would have stopped sinning - not continue and then whinging, opps...I meant praying.., to god for forgiveness.
I respectfully beg to differ. I agree many religious people display the negative traits you mention, (Exhibit A: our own Jag-off) but I've met more than a few who do not. Everyone of us has a belief system based on faith, including so called "rationalists" such as DBT and virtually every atheist on the planet. Religious folk are at least willing to admit the primacy of faith in their belief system, whereas materialists and atheists generally deny their reliance on faith (and I'm not talking sectarian faith here) even though the necessity of a certain kid of faith to their belief system is so obvious and axiomatic. The problem with people like Jag is that they are such obvious fakes and frauds. A person who purports to be religious who is sincere in their belief and strives to act consistent with it is generally an admirable person. Its the one's that wear it on their sleeves while spouting racism, out and out idiocy and dropping F-bombs left and right (like Jag-off) that are off-putting.
Too Freaking Funny.
My grandad was a lumberjack and dad was pure oilfield. 8th grade education who ended up a Multimillionaire owner of a few businesses but he did cuss.
I'm sure you're just the guy to prove God wrong when He said the sins of the father will be visited on the sons through the 4th generation.
Jesus answered Satan many times with scripture. I think it's a good idea.
Proverbs 26 12 Do you see a person wise in their own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for them.
That is one means of suppressing open enquiry and dialogue. Something that faith tends to discourage. Too much questioning being seen as a bad thing, rather than the positive thing it is.
Using logic and common sense seems to be a waste of time.
I used to have sympathy for the believers (I thought that there was something wrong with a person who had faith) but now am convinced that the foundation for a true believer is arrogance driven by fear leading to discrimination, intolerance, hatred etc - sourcing the sins that it is intented to protect against. True believers would have learned their lesson and would have stopped sinning - not continue and then whinging, opps...I meant praying.., to god for forgiveness.
I respectfully beg to differ. I agree many religious people display the negative traits you mention, (Exhibit A: our own Jag-off) but I've met more than a few who do not. Everyone of us has a belief system based on faith, including so called "rationalists" such as DBT and virtually every atheist on the planet. Religious folk are at least willing to admit the primacy of faith in their belief system, whereas materialists and atheists generally deny their reliance on faith (and I'm not talking sectarian faith here) even though the necessity of a certain kid of faith to their belief system is so obvious and axiomatic. The problem with people like Jag is that they are such obvious fakes and frauds. A person who purports to be religious who is sincere in their belief and strives to act consistent with it is generally an admirable person. Its the one's that wear it on their sleeves while spouting racism, out and out idiocy and dropping F-bombs left and right (like Jag-off) that are off-putting.
Too Freaking Funny.
My grandad was a lumberjack and dad was pure oilfield. 8th grade education who ended up a Multimillionaire owner of a few businesses but he did cuss.
I'm sure you're just the guy to prove God wrong when He said the sins of the father will be visited on the sons through the 4th generation.
I have wondered about the mocking naysayers who show up like clockwork on these Christian themed threads. Even though they profess to be atheists, agnostics or some other form of unbeliever, something is amiss… even disingenuous…. seems to me that there is a piece or missing.
I find it difficult to believe that these naysayers have no belief in God and certainly no belief in Jesus.
Then another angle or factor presented itself…..
The key motivator …..to their ongoing disparagement of Jesus …..may be that at some level they truly do want to believe but are wracked with pride, anxiety and doubt…. they disparage something that has proven unattainable…. they criticize and disparage what they really do desire …..but have not…. at least yet….. not yet obtained.
They hear the testimonies…. they hear about God… they hear about peace….. they hear about a greater power….. but they do not have it and yet … it seems to me....wish they did.
So, they disparage what they desire but cannot obtain…… this is old fashioned sour grapes.
Seems that God honors those who seek Him with reverent fear and perhaps even humility….
Those that clamor for a God that will serve them and be the god they want in their own hearts may remain disgruntled like the fox who could not reach the grapes.
The so called naysayers may be doing a community service by providing a bit of balance. If something is true, it should be able to withstand questioning without people wailing and gnashing their teeth over it.
Using logic and common sense seems to be a waste of time.
I used to have sympathy for the believers (I thought that there was something wrong with a person who had faith) but now am convinced that the foundation for a true believer is arrogance driven by fear leading to discrimination, intolerance, hatred etc - sourcing the sins that it is intented to protect against. True believers would have learned their lesson and would have stopped sinning - not continue and then whinging, opps...I meant praying.., to god for forgiveness.
I respectfully beg to differ. I agree many religious people display the negative traits you mention, (Exhibit A: our own Jag-off) but I've met more than a few who do not. Everyone of us has a belief system based on faith, including so called "rationalists" such as DBT and virtually every atheist on the planet. Religious folk are at least willing to admit the primacy of faith in their belief system, whereas materialists and atheists generally deny their reliance on faith (and I'm not talking sectarian faith here) even though the necessity of a certain kid of faith to their belief system is so obvious and axiomatic. The problem with people like Jag is that they are such obvious fakes and frauds. A person who purports to be religious who is sincere in their belief and strives to act consistent with it is generally an admirable person. Its the one's that wear it on their sleeves while spouting racism, out and out idiocy and dropping F-bombs left and right (like Jag-off) that are off-putting.
Too Freaking Funny.
My grandad was a lumberjack and dad was pure oilfield. 8th grade education who ended up a Multimillionaire owner of a few businesses but he did cuss.
I'm sure you're just the guy to prove God wrong when He said the sins of the father will be visited on the sons through the 4th generation.
Good luck.
Now, go and judge some more.
Jesus, you are a dumb-[bleep]. Nowhere have I attempted to disprove the existence of God. On the contrary, I've argued that it is inconsistent for atheists to attack the "faith" of believers when their own foundational premises require a kind of faith in their own right. What I have done, with respect to religious belief, is call out the one obvious fraud and fake on this forum, namely you---an intolerant, irrational racial bigot with a foul mouth who wraps himself in Christianity while his every word and act seems to deny it.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
2 Corinthians 4:4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
It requires faith to believe in the Good News things to come and birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Men are liars. Not Him, and those are His words, not mine.
You push the lies of the Satan you serve, thereby proving Christ lives.
2 Corinthians 4:4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
So it's not their fault then, since they've been blinded and unable to see?
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
It requires faith to believe in the Good News things to come and birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Men are liars. Not Him, and those are His words, not mine.
You push the lies of the Satan you serve, thereby proving Christ lives.
We should thank what I'll call hecklers on these threads. They make me think harder. I'' start a prayer for all of us.
I'm not trying to heckle, I consider it a legitimate question. If Satan has blinded the eyes of the unbelievers, how is it their fault if they can't beleive.
We should thank what I'll call hecklers on these threads. They make me think harder. I'' start a prayer for all of us.
I'm not trying to heckle, I consider it a legitimate question. If Satan has blinded the eyes of the unbelievers, how is it their fault if they can't beleive.
Look dude...
It's like watching Back to the Future. If you get all analytical about it you're not going to enjoy singing the songs, giving 10% of your income to some ass hole, or learning to forgive the pedophile juggling those communion trays.
Just have faith that Marty will make it back and all is well.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
No satan, no GOD.
Exactly...
No easter bunny, no tooth fairy, no santa clause, no halloween ghosts...
2 Corinthians 4:4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
So it's not their fault then, since they've been blinded and unable to see?
God isn't going to make you love him. It's called free will.
Radical minded men that never met Jesus nor witnessed any wacky claims made about Jesus.
Hebrew monotheism took hold cause they went about the landsape restricting freedom of religion by destroying peoples private pagan altars and shrines...in order to centralize control with their own draconian abritrary justice patriarchal brand of God.
Christians then applied another method of coercion by psyhcologically threatening weak minded folk that they will burn in a new kind of hell they conveniently invented , if they dont convert and believe.
Pagans in the ancient east and other places like ancient Roman occupied, Gaul, Germania and Britannia went about their own business with their own Gods without forcing such beliefs on others. In fact members of Roman legions and auxiliary regiments that relocated from one part of the republic or empire to another, would also bring/introduce other deities from those distant places to their new location... Some folks adopted them, or they would stick with their own prefered deities, and they were also free to create new syncretism form local deities of their own liking.
Just imagine such a variety of pagan God worship all largely getting along just fine.
them come along the insecure control freak god bothering nutter monotheists... Christians like the jews before them also went to the extent of systematically destroying Pagan shrines.
We should thank what I'll call hecklers on these threads. They make me think harder. I'' start a prayer for all of us.
I'm not trying to heckle, I consider it a legitimate question. If Satan has blinded the eyes of the unbelievers, how is it their fault if they can't beleive.
Look dude...
It's like watching Back to the Future. If you get all analytical about it you're not going to enjoy singing the songs, giving 10% of your income to some ass hole, or learning to forgive the pedophile juggling those communion trays.
Just have faith that Marty will make it back and all is well.
The populations grown a fair jab since the Bible was written we have 7.5 billion people now. Many of them pray to god. Many pray to Jesus some have some other god. They say less pray to Jesus lately this side of the pond but its growing like crazy in Africa.
So how does it work now. If you've got hundreds of millions, maybe a billion Christians? If they all pray every day.... son! That's like days, weeks maybe months worth of prayers if you play back one by one. Every day, over and over. God got staff? Do they upload all the prayers onto a zip drive and then boom! it all gets into God's head and he zip drives back instructions.... hold on that won't work. God makes all the decisions and happenings. Hmm. I think it might be that he gets busy once in a while and may not answer all the prayers. Just thinkin out loud...
We should thank what I'll call hecklers on these threads. They make me think harder. I'' start a prayer for all of us.
I'm not trying to heckle, I consider it a legitimate question. If Satan has blinded the eyes of the unbelievers, how is it their fault if they can't beleive.
Look dude...
It's like watching Back to the Future. If you get all analytical about it you're not going to enjoy singing the songs, giving 10% of your income to some ass hole, or learning to forgive the pedophile juggling those communion trays.
Just have faith that Marty will make it back and all is well.
Lol I forgot how funny that show was sometimes! RIP Ray
2 Corinthians 4:4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
So it's not their fault then, since they've been blinded and unable to see?
God isn't going to make you love him. It's called free will.
We should thank what I'll call hecklers on these threads. They make me think harder. I'' start a prayer for all of us.
I'm not trying to heckle, I consider it a legitimate question. If Satan has blinded the eyes of the unbelievers, how is it their fault if they can't beleive.
Look dude...
It's like watching Back to the Future. If you get all analytical about it you're not going to enjoy singing the songs, giving 10% of your income to some ass hole, or learning to forgive the pedophile juggling those communion trays.
Just have faith that Marty will make it back and all is well.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
I think some of you Christians overdo the whole praying thing. Praying all the time for the most inconsequential nonsense. When I was in Texas, I saw high school football teams praying for victory over each other...really? Went to a benefit potluck once and they prayed for money. If you God Botherers made less noise maybe the Diety would have time to sort it out and give some kids in torment in the pediatrics ward a break now and then, since a lot of them are way too young to have done a whole lot of sinning. Assuming of course, He is a loving and merciful God.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
Did you mean decision making does not implicate free will? Virtually all the leading materialist mind-science thinkers say otherwise. All thought (they say) is the result of electro-chemical, material processes, including the thought involved in deciding what to do (viz., choosing). You are amazingly ignorant of the implications of the philosophy you constantly (and reactively) defend.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
2 Corinthians 4:4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
So it's not their fault then, since they've been blinded and unable to see?
God isn't going to make you love him. It's called free will.
Nothing to do with free will.
It hasn't even been shown that there is god, yet alone one that is lovable.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
Also, the brain and mind are not the same thing.
Mind being the activity of a brain. Anything that effects the brain alters mind. Drink too much whisky, you pass out. You pass out because Alcohol effects brain function.
Except that we know from science that the mind is much more than merely the activity of the brain, but regardless, it doesn't change the fact that materialism denies that free will is anything but illusory.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
Also, the brain and mind are not the same thing.
Show me a mind not connected to a brain.
That they are related does not mean they are the same. Artificial intelligence is not connected to a brain.
Except that we know from science that the mind is much more than merely the activity of the brain, but regardless, it doesn't change the fact that materialism denies that free will is anything but illusory.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
Did you mean decision making does not implicate free will? Virtually all the leading materialist mind-science thinkers say otherwise. All thought (they say) is the result of electro-chemical, material processes, including the thought involved in deciding what to do (viz., choosing). You are amazingly ignorant of the implications of the philosophy you constantly (and reactively) defend.
You clearly don't understand the free will debate. Especially from the point of view of neuroscience.....how decisions are actually being made by the brain. A fly can make decisions, left, right, feed, mate, but the decisions that it can make are determined and limited by the architecture of its brain.
Our own range of cognitive abilities are enabled not by free will, a poorly defend term, but the sheer mind boggling complexity of our neural architecture.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
Did you mean decision making does not implicate free will? Virtually all the leading materialist mind-science thinkers say otherwise. All thought (they say) is the result of electro-chemical, material processes, including the thought involved in deciding what to do (viz., choosing). You are amazingly ignorant of the implications of the philosophy you constantly (and reactively) defend.
You clearly don't understand the free will debate. Especially from the point of view of neuroscience.....how decisions are actually being made by the brain. A fly can make decisions, left, right, feed, mate, but the decisions that it can make are determined and limited by the architecture of its brain.
Our own range of cognitive abilities are enabled not by free will, a poorly defend term, but the sheer mind boggling complexity of our neural architecture.
Actually, it is you who doesn't understand it because either you are unwilling to acknowledged or are simply ignorant of the fact that virtually all of the leading thinkers in brain-mind science (of a materialist ilk) deny that free will is possible.
It doesn't require faith to lack convinction in the truth of something that has little or no evidence. Nor is it hard to change your mind if evidence comes along. It's called reason.
But rationality (reason) presupposes that the mind is free to apprehend truth. Yet materialism (radical skepticism) denies the metaphysical freedom of the mind period. This is why they are like that first Cretin who said "all Cretins are liars". Their foundational premises deny there is any basis to prefer rationality over superstition, including their own claims of rationality.
As far as I know nobody argues that the mind/brain cannot acquire information, process that information, make sense of it and respond. Of course we can do these things.
The issue is logic and reason in relation to evidence....evidence being a body of information that anyone can access and evaluate.
Claims made in ancient scrolls slone is not evidence, mot without independent verification.
When it comes to the philosophy of mind, the materialism that birthed neo-Darwinian evolution holds that free-will is an illusion and accordingly that truth is a fiction, including the "truth" that neo-Darwinism explains the origins of life and its constant change. That is why materialists are like that first Cretin "who said that all Cretins are liars." There are virtually no Kantian dualists (or any other kind of dualists for that matter) in avant-garde modern mind-science. Why? Because they have an a priori "faith based" commitment to materialism (which the more honest ones readily admit). Virtually all the leading mind-science thinkers believe that all thought is determined by material, electro-chemical processes which are governed by fixed laws. Yet they also admit not having a clue how the brain and mind work to create thought. In other words, they all believe there is no uncertainty in the record of cause and effect when it comes to human thought and action and therefore that there is no freedom of thought and accordingly, no such thing as truth. But like the Marxists and Freudians before them, they exempt themselves from the strictures of their own theory on purely idiosyncratic grounds. Their radical skepticism leads them to doubt the very possibility of their own existence.
Decision making is not free will. Nobody argues that a brain cannot make decisions.
Did you mean decision making does not implicate free will? Virtually all the leading materialist mind-science thinkers say otherwise. All thought (they say) is the result of electro-chemical, material processes, including the thought involved in deciding what to do (viz., choosing). You are amazingly ignorant of the implications of the philosophy you constantly (and reactively) defend.
You clearly don't understand the free will debate. Especially from the point of view of neuroscience.....how decisions are actually being made by the brain. A fly can make decisions, left, right, feed, mate, but the decisions that it can make are determined and limited by the architecture of its brain.
Our own range of cognitive abilities are enabled not by free will, a poorly defend term, but the sheer mind boggling complexity of our neural architecture.
Actually, it is you who doesn't understand it because either you are unwilling to acknowledged or are simply ignorant of the fact that virtually all of the leading thinkers in brain-mind science (of a materialist ilk) deny that free will is possible.
Where you go wrong is in assuming that the ability to make decisions and act upon them is free will.
You conflate decision making and free will. The experts don't deny the ability of a brain to acquire and process information and make decisions....they correctly point out that this ability has nothing to do with free will. Unconscious neural activity precedes conscious experience of mind and tthought.
Do some reading. Mark Hallet, a specialist on the cognition of behaviour is a good start
Just as a small sample of the neuroscience of decision making and motor action;
''This review deals with the physiology of the initiation of a voluntary movement and the appreciation of whether it is voluntary or not. I argue that free will is not a driving force for movement, but a conscious awareness concerning the nature of the movement. Movement initiation and the perception of willing the movement can be separately manipulated. Movement is generated subconsciously, and the conscious sense of volition comes later, but the exact time of this event is difficult to assess because of the potentially illusory nature of introspection. Neurological disorders of volition are also reviewed. The evidence suggests that movement is initiated in the frontal lobe, particularly the mesial areas, and the sense of volition arises as the result of a corollary discharge likely involving multiple areas with reciprocal connections including those in the parietal lobe and insular cortex.''' - Volitional control of movement: The physiology of free will Clinical Neurophysiology, Volume 118, Issue 6, Pages 1179-1192 M. Hallett
Also by Hallett
How Can There Be Voluntary Movement Without Free Will? ''Humans do not appear to be purely reflexive organisms, simple automatons. A vast array of different movements are generated in a variety of settings. Is there an alternative to free will? Movement, in the final analysis, comes only from muscle contraction. Muscle contraction is under the complete control of the alpha motoneurons in the spinal cord. When the alpha motoneurons are active, there will be movement. Activity of the alpha motoneurons is a product of the different synaptic events on their dendrites and cell bodies. There is a complex summation of EPSPs and IPSPs, and when the threshold for an action potential is crossed, the cell fires. There are a large number of important inputs, and one of the most important is from the corticospinal tract which conveys a large part of the cortical control. Such a situation likely holds also for the motor cortex and the cells of origin of the corticospinal tract. Their firing depends on their synaptic inputs. And, a similar situation must hold for all the principal regions giving input to the motor cortex. For any cortical region, its activity will depend on its synaptic inputs. Some motor cortical inputs come via only a few synapses from sensory cortices, and such influences on motor output are clear. Some inputs will come from regions, such as the limbic areas, many synapses away from both primary sensory and motor cortices. At any one time, the activity of the motor cortex, and its commands to the spinal cord, will reflect virtually all the activity in the entire brain. Is it necessary that there be anything else? This can be a complete description of the process of movement selection, and even if there is something more -- like free will -- it would have to operate through such neuronal mechanisms. The view that there is no such thing as free will as an inner causal agent has been advocated by a number of philosophers, scientists, and neurologists including Ryle, Adrian, Skinner and Fisher.(Fisher 1993)''[
2 Corinthians 4:4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
So it's not their fault then, since they've been blinded and unable to see?
God isn't going to make you love him. It's called free will.
That didn't even come close to answering the question.
This thread is an excellent example, and proof, as are all threads here related to the subject of Christianity.
Matthew 7:13-14 (NIV) The Narrow and Wide Gates
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
"A few years ago something like 97% believed we were going to die from global warming."
No they didn't. Some Democrat/Socialist woman writer (not a climate scientist) cherry picked scientific articles written by the Democrat/Socialist scientists who were pushing the man caused global warming theory and put them in a book. She was kind of like the people who created the New Testament bible.
Amazing how many make the same mistake the flat earth scientists did before being proven wrong ages ago by Columbus.
A few years ago something like 97% believed we were going to die from global warming.
The humanist worshippers keep thinking each time, "This time we got it right", just as they do each time they find the "missing link".
They still can't come up with a credible explanation as to how life started or create an eyelash.
They worship the scientists, rather than the Creator of scientists.
You cant say 97% of people thought they were going to die from global warming... then say credible a few sentences later... if you do, your making fun of yourself for us. It really ruins the fun of it all.
Kinda funny, a god peddler poking fun at global warming. The irony of it.
Dumbass. Reread. It was about scientists. Something like 97% were say we were having progressive global warming. Sheesh. English is so hard for the dumb.
Dumbass. Reread. It was about scientists. Something like 97% were say we were having progressive global warming. Sheesh. English is so hard for the dumb.
Hahahahaha
Mirror mirror on the wall....
I agree, english is hard for the dumb... hurry up and edit this one too before people can keep poking fun at you.
DBT, have you ever asked Christ into your heart if He exists?
Brahman? Allah? Zeus? Ra? Marduk? Yahweh....who had a PR makeover in New Testament times....or some other version of God? Perhaps new age universal mind, or creative principle? Or a set and forget Deity that got the ball rolling but plays no part in it?
I think I worked out why god doesn't answer prayers (apart from god not being real) - the believers know the rules but continue to sin, time and time again, and pray for forgiveness, and god can't understand why they never learn their lesson and just comply, so puts them on the "prayer ignore" list. I don't think he has the time to go back and review/update the list - so once on there you're just blowing hot air into your hands. Can't deny the logic of that and hopefully this will be added as a clarification in the next edition of the bible.
I think also that Steven Hawking living far beyond the expected life time of someone with his condition would be considered a miracle, and a testimony to the power of non-prayer. How do the believers explain that one? (I know there will be answers, or at least responses.)
![[Linked Image from cccb.edu]](https://cccb.edu/wp-content/uploads/Lead-me-to-the-cross-1.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/35/85/083585148a419fe0aed42e24a034d447.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/sBCDw8y.jpg)
![[Linked Image from darrellcreswell.files.wordpress.com]](https://darrellcreswell.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/mustard-seed-faith-matthew-1720.jpg)
![[Linked Image from ]]( https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ShinyLimitedDrongo-size_restricted.gif)
![[Linked Image from static.turbosquid.com]](https://static.turbosquid.com/Preview/2015/09/29__07_18_12/Main.pngadf50c88-b214-47f6-ab2c-acdf85bf73a7Original.jpg)