|
Post by Lee on Oct 10, 2020 20:53:08 GMT -5
That goes with the territory of being the clay and not the potter. Don’t you want to grow? Or do you hate growth. Grow? H Do you believe that a piece of clay "grows?"
Have you really grown any yourself?
Might it not rather be that instead your "growing" that you are really just stuck in the OT creation story of being created from clay?
If I had a choice between being unformed clay and something refined, I’d choose something refined. I mean I have some level of feelings at stake here. The bigger question is are we evolving with an end in view or are we only running in circles. Or is the entire question of progress vanity. And do we have evidence that we are an adequate light to ourselves for the journey or have we been dependent on the light of God.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Oct 10, 2020 22:10:02 GMT -5
Grow? Do you believe that a piece of clay "grows?"
Have you really grown any yourself?
Might it not rather be that instead your "growing" that you are really just stuck in the OT creation story of being created from clay?
If I had a choice between being unformed clay and something refined, I’d choose something refined. I mean I have some level of feelings at stake here. The bigger question is are we evolving with an end in view or are we only running in circles. Or is the entire question of progress vanity. And do we have evidence that we are an adequate light to ourselves for the journey or have we been dependent on the light of God. Lee, it is hard to communicate with you because we don't even use the same vocabulary! Look at some of your terms.
Like the word "refined," - removal of impurities or unwanted elements You think that we are are all full of "impurities" that need taken out in order to "grow?"
The word Evolving : develop gradually, especially from a simple to a more complex form. So evolving does NOT mean "running in circles," -in fact more the opposite :
The word progress: forward or onward movement toward a destination. So what has the progress to do with "vanity?"
Vanity: excessive pride in or admiration of one's own appearance or achievements.
I don't understand how you fit your terms into growing.
As for whether we as humanity in general or as individuals have evidence that we have adequate light to ourselves for progress on that the journey, -yes, I believe that we do have that ability & have shown to have it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2020 2:48:02 GMT -5
Once again I am unclear as to what point you are making. My point was that there is absolutely no sign of a loving, caring, all powerful God in a coronavirus world, a fact that led to Professor Lennox’s desperate attempts to explain away his absence. The fact that coronavirus is (or isn’t) as noxious as flu is of no relevance whatsoever when it comes to the absence of the Christian God. It’s not only during the coronavirus pandemic that the Christian God has been absent. He has been continually absent throughout history whether it’s in Auschwitz, during the Spanish flu, the Justinian plague, the smallpox plague of 1775 or the Irish famine. As to the question of how I can make the assertion that truth doesn’t have the authority of your God, that is very simple. The reason is that it doesn’t. Truth is an authority in itself. The Christian God isn’t. And of course you are entitled to your view that my assertion is evil just as I am entitled to my view that it isn’t. Annan is entitled to think that my response was excellent just as you are entitled to your view that it wasnt. These are merely beliefs and opinions. They are not truths. The fact that the Christian God is absent during the coronavirus pandemic is a truth. Any claim that he isn’t is merely a belief or an opinion. One thing we do agree on is that it is possible I could discern the truth about God and you couldn’t, just as it is equally possible that you could discern the truth about God and I couldn’t. The fact is that I have offered credible explanations for the discrepancy whereas you haven’t. Matt10 Suffering is not a proof or disproof of the existence of God. Moreover Christianity has never said its citizens would be free of suffering. What is does offer is a satisfying interpretation of it, namely that suffering is the result of sin. Of course there is the dangerous creation we have to negotiate, which may not have a direct human cause. How we respond to life itself, whether we can find meaning and joy in our lives inspite of suffering is an indication of how well we are contending victoriously over sin. Or maybe the creation has a direct human cause. Christ created all things and presented as man and God. I haven’t claimed that suffering is proof or disproof of the existence of God. What I have claimed is that the suffering that took place in Auschwitz etc is proof of the absence of the Christian God. It isn’t proof of the absence of a God who is a monster or a God who is a psychopath. It isn’t proof of the absence of a God who gets some sick kick out of watching people suffer while standing idly refusing to do anything to ease their suffering. It isn’t proof of the absence of the OT God. It is simply proof of the absence of a loving, caring, just and all powerful Christian God. It is evidence that your God does not exist in reality but rather exists only within your mind. A God that exists only in the mind can do anything in theory but nothing in practice. A God that exists only in the mind can easily be deemed to have unlimited powers but when called on to exercise any of them will inevitably be found wanting. I suggest cutting off your arm and then praying to your God for it to grow back if your want to prove this hypothesis. I also suggest not doing it if you value your arm. There is a reason why the believer has to carry around a great big book of excuses for the Christian God’s absence just as there is a reason why Professor Lennox wrote a book to explain the Christian God’s absence in the word of the coronavirus. The reason is that rather than being omnipresent the Christian God is permanently omniabsent. As regards your interpretation that suffering is the result of sin, while you may find this interpretation satisfying it is also an interpretation which does not stand up to scrutiny. One day old babies suffer. A gorilla caught in a snare for a week suffers. Jesus himself who was apparently sinless suffered. A buffalo being eaten alive by a pride of lions on the great African plains suffers. What sin has a buffalo committed? What sin have any of these committed? Claiming that suffering is a result of sin is merely another daft theory that Christians have had to come up with to explain away God’s absence just as Professor Lennox has had to do with his book on the coronavirus. Christians can’t even make up their minds whether their God intervenes in the world or not. Remember only truth stands up to scrutiny; your sin and suffering theory does not. Matt10
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 11, 2020 18:33:10 GMT -5
Christians unanimously agree God has intervened with suffering, beginning with the introduction of the rule of law as opposed to the tyrant, continuing with the revelation of his own son, who inaugurated our era whereby we are summoned beyond a reward/stimulus relationship with God to the ultimate reality, where we ourselves live out our lives to the furtherance of good or evil.
I did say that some problems with a human soul can’t we sourced directly to sin. To eradicate every ill every soul has ever suffered, one would have to be God himself. I think we should be grateful for each time God has localized himself in the personality and nature of distinct things, like human beings, or squirrels. We should celebrate the overwhelming victory God imposes or expresses in nature. Most babies become healthy men and women, physically speaking.
Nevertheless the problem of sin goes on. This is our problem to resolve, not God’s first of all. He did not create us to be machines; he gave us moral freewill and discretion to participate in creation. If the twentieth century represented anything, it is that the madmen are getting worse and worse. You know, the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Mao’s. We may have defeated those forms, but a reincarnation of the beast rages on.
We have a job on our hands, to resist the devils best as he would annihilate every good thing created by God.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2020 17:56:52 GMT -5
Christians unanimously agree God has intervened with suffering, beginning with the introduction of the rule of law as opposed to the tyrant, continuing with the revelation of his own son, who inaugurated our era whereby we are summoned beyond a reward/stimulus relationship with God to the ultimate reality, where we ourselves live out our lives to the furtherance of good or evil. I did say that some problems with a human soul can’t we sourced directly to sin. To eradicate every ill every soul has ever suffered, one would have to be God himself. I think we should be grateful for each time God has localized himself in the personality and nature of distinct things, like human beings, or squirrels. We should celebrate the overwhelming victory God imposes or expresses in nature. Most babies become healthy men and women, physically speaking. Nevertheless the problem of sin goes on. This is our problem to resolve, not God’s first of all. He did not create us to be machines; he gave us moral freewill and discretion to participate in creation. If the twentieth century represented anything, it is that the madmen are getting worse and worse. You know, the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Mao’s. We may have defeated those forms, but a reincarnation of the beast rages on. We have a job on our hands, to resist the devils best as he would annihilate every good thing created by God. I note that you haven’t attempted to address the permanent absence of the Christian God. Nor have you attempted to address the fact that your suffering and sin theory does not stand up to scrutiny. Nor have you been able to refute the claim that your God exists only in the minds of those who believe in him. The antidote to belief is reality. The believer when faced with reality must ignore it in order for belief to be maintained. Of course it matters not that Christians unanimously agree that God has intervened with suffering. The fact is they are wrong. This is merely a belief they hold. It is not a truth. It has no more validity than Muslims unanimously agreeing that Mohammad flew to heaven on a winged horse. Truth isn’t measured by unanimity. Christians used to be unanimous in believing that the earth was a few thousand years old and flat. I must express surprise at your claim that most babies become healthy men and women, physically speaking. This is not a view based on a study of history. (See Volk & Atkinson, 2008;. Volk, 2011) The fact that most babies survive today has nothing whatsoever to do with the Christian God but is down to scientific advances by mankind. There is nothing to celebrate about victories by your God when it comes to the survival of children. In fact the history of your God in the Old Testament is a history of God slaughtering them. Whether it’s sin as a problem for us to resolve or God giving us moral freewill and discretion or us having a job on our hands to resist the devil these are all merely beliefs which you hold. And they are all beliefs based on religious conditioning brought about by a geographical accident of birth. They most certainly are not truths. As I’ve said many times before; all the believer can offer is their beliefs and quotations from scripture. They do not offer credible evidence or explanations because they do not have any to offer. Matt10
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Oct 12, 2020 18:14:04 GMT -5
No, -my post was not really a "tit for tat, metapsychology," -because there is no "equivalent retaliation " behind my answer.
My post was an logical explanation for why some people believe some of the ideas that they have. Not only was your post a logical explanation, it was the only explanation that stands up to scrutiny. There is no deception like self deception and I say this as one who once misinterpreted the thoughts inside my head as coming from a loving, living, life eternal giving God whereas I realise now they were ..... (wait for it) ..... just some thoughts inside my head. Thoughts that were a direct result of my not insignificant religious conditioning. Has truth ever spoken loud enough to be heard by a Sentinelese tribesman? Are Yanomami Indians hard of hearing? Do the Bono people of west Africa who worship the great goddess Aberewaa have selective hearing? Of course not. Claiming that they do is merely an attempt to explain away the fact that the Christian God is rather less omnipresent than believers believe Him to be and why the immutable voice of their God in so many parts of the world is so inexplicably silent. Matt10 Your last point is what set me on the road to non belief. These people had never heard of the Hebrew/Christian god so because of their place on the globe they could not be "saved" as they had not heard the gospel. Clearly, tge belief that there is a god and he makes good pizza is a fallacy.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 13, 2020 0:52:30 GMT -5
Christians unanimously agree God has intervened with suffering, beginning with the introduction of the rule of law as opposed to the tyrant, continuing with the revelation of his own son, who inaugurated our era whereby we are summoned beyond a reward/stimulus relationship with God to the ultimate reality, where we ourselves live out our lives to the furtherance of good or evil. I did say that some problems with a human soul can’t we sourced directly to sin. To eradicate every ill every soul has ever suffered, one would have to be God himself. I think we should be grateful for each time God has localized himself in the personality and nature of distinct things, like human beings, or squirrels. We should celebrate the overwhelming victory God imposes or expresses in nature. Most babies become healthy men and women, physically speaking. Nevertheless the problem of sin goes on. This is our problem to resolve, not God’s first of all. He did not create us to be machines; he gave us moral freewill and discretion to participate in creation. If the twentieth century represented anything, it is that the madmen are getting worse and worse. You know, the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Mao’s. We may have defeated those forms, but a reincarnation of the beast rages on. We have a job on our hands, to resist the devils best as he would annihilate every good thing created by God. I note that you haven’t attempted to address the permanent absence of the Christian God. Nor have you attempted to address the fact that your suffering and sin theory does not stand up to scrutiny. Nor have you been able to refute the claim that your God exists only in the minds of those who believe in him. The antidote to belief is reality. The believer when faced with reality must ignore it in order for belief to be maintained. Of course it matters not that Christians unanimously agree that God has intervened with suffering. The fact is they are wrong. This is merely a belief they hold. It is not a truth. It has no more validity than Muslims unanimously agreeing that Mohammad flew to heaven on a winged horse. Truth isn’t measured by unanimity. Christians used to be unanimous in believing that the earth was a few thousand years old and flat. I must express surprise at your claim that most babies become healthy men and women, physically speaking. This is not a view based on a study of history. (See Volk & Atkinson, 2008;. Volk, 2011) The fact that most babies survive today has nothing whatsoever to do with the Christian God but is down to scientific advances by mankind. There is nothing to celebrate about victories by your God when it comes to the survival of children. In fact the history of your God in the Old Testament is a history of God slaughtering them. Whether it’s sin as a problem for us to resolve or God giving us moral freewill and discretion or us having a job on our hands to resist the devil these are all merely beliefs which you hold. And they are all beliefs based on religious conditioning brought about by a geographical accident of birth. They most certainly are not truths. As I’ve said many times before; all the believer can offer is their beliefs and quotations from scripture. They do not offer credible evidence or explanations because they do not have any to offer. Matt10 I think you’re a head case. As for myself, I will continue to interpret the world recognizing believers, their faith in their heavenly home and their contributions.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 13, 2020 0:57:27 GMT -5
Not only was your post a logical explanation, it was the only explanation that stands up to scrutiny. There is no deception like self deception and I say this as one who once misinterpreted the thoughts inside my head as coming from a loving, living, life eternal giving God whereas I realise now they were ..... (wait for it) ..... just some thoughts inside my head. Thoughts that were a direct result of my not insignificant religious conditioning. Has truth ever spoken loud enough to be heard by a Sentinelese tribesman? Are Yanomami Indians hard of hearing? Do the Bono people of west Africa who worship the great goddess Aberewaa have selective hearing? Of course not. Claiming that they do is merely an attempt to explain away the fact that the Christian God is rather less omnipresent than believers believe Him to be and why the immutable voice of their God in so many parts of the world is so inexplicably silent. Matt10 Your last point is what set me on the road to non belief. These people had never heard of the Hebrew/Christian god so because of their place on the globe they could not be "saved" as they had not heard the gospel. Clearly, tge belief that there is a god and he makes good pizza is a fallacy. Have you ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, “Self, what might salvation be?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Oct 13, 2020 2:49:40 GMT -5
Your last point is what set me on the road to non belief. These people had never heard of the Hebrew/Christian god so because of their place on the globe they could not be "saved" as they had not heard the gospel. Clearly, tge belief that there is a god and he makes good pizza is a fallacy. Have you ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, “Self, what might salvation be? Saved from what?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2020 5:31:58 GMT -5
Have you ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, “Self, what might salvation be? Saved from what? Saved from burning for all eternity in the imaginary hell which the religious indoctrination of your childhood led you to believe was real. You can read about recovering from the fear of hell as a result of childhood religious indoctrination at the link below. Matt10 lifeafterdogma.org/2020/06/30/hell-trauma/
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Oct 13, 2020 11:53:52 GMT -5
Saved from burning for all eternity in the imaginary hell which the religious indoctrination of your childhood led you to believe was real. You can read about recovering from the fear of hell as a result of childhood religious indoctrination at the link below. Matt10 lifeafterdogma.org/2020/06/30/hell-trauma/I have already recovered from that indoctrination, thanks Matt. I can't believe there are people who still believe in the superstitious mumbo jumbo of the bible.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Oct 13, 2020 13:55:41 GMT -5
I note that you haven’t attempted to address the permanent absence of the Christian God. Nor have you attempted to address the fact that your suffering and sin theory does not stand up to scrutiny. Nor have you been able to refute the claim that your God exists only in the minds of those who believe in him. The antidote to belief is reality. The believer when faced with reality must ignore it in order for belief to be maintained. Of course it matters not that Christians unanimously agree that God has intervened with suffering. The fact is they are wrong. This is merely a belief they hold. It is not a truth. It has no more validity than Muslims unanimously agreeing that Mohammad flew to heaven on a winged horse. Truth isn’t measured by unanimity. Christians used to be unanimous in believing that the earth was a few thousand years old and flat. I must express surprise at your claim that most babies become healthy men and women, physically speaking. This is not a view based on a study of history. (See Volk & Atkinson, 2008;. Volk, 2011) The fact that most babies survive today has nothing whatsoever to do with the Christian God but is down to scientific advances by mankind. There is nothing to celebrate about victories by your God when it comes to the survival of children. In fact the history of your God in the Old Testament is a history of God slaughtering them. Whether it’s sin as a problem for us to resolve or God giving us moral freewill and discretion or us having a job on our hands to resist the devil these are all merely beliefs which you hold. And they are all beliefs based on religious conditioning brought about by a geographical accident of birth. They most certainly are not truths. As I’ve said many times before; all the believer can offer is their beliefs and quotations from scripture. They do not offer credible evidence or explanations because they do not have any to offer. Matt10 I think you’re a head case. As for myself, I will continue to interpret the world recognizing believers, their faith in their heavenly home and their contributions. Lee, It is interesting that you think that Matt is a "head case." Indeed Matt does use his brain to think through religious beliefs.
As for your statement that you "will continue to interpret the world recognizing believers," -surely you recognize that it wouldn't matter if EVERYONE in the whole world believed something, -if it really is NOT true their believing will not MAKE it true!
People really need to ask themselves WHY it is that they would rather believe there is a "god," who is in control, -a belief that makes them feel comfortable and safe rather than to face the facts of the reality of life & the world as it is.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Oct 14, 2020 14:51:33 GMT -5
Your last point is what set me on the road to non belief. These people had never heard of the Hebrew/Christian god so because of their place on the globe they could not be "saved" as they had not heard the gospel. Clearly, tge belief that there is a god and he makes good pizza is a fallacy. Have you ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, “Self, what might salvation be? Lee, -have YOU ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, "Self, -just exactly what are these sins that I have committed that I need to be delivered from?"
Then Lee, have YOU ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, "Self, what will happen to me if I am NOT "saved from those so called "sins?"
Next comes the question to oneself , " Am I not being selfish that I should believe and rely on someone else, -in this case Jesus, -an innocent person to die a horrible death just to "save " me from the consequences of my errors but shouldn't I instead recognize my mistakes and work in the future to correct them myself?"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 1:24:51 GMT -5
I note that you haven’t attempted to address the permanent absence of the Christian God. Nor have you attempted to address the fact that your suffering and sin theory does not stand up to scrutiny. Nor have you been able to refute the claim that your God exists only in the minds of those who believe in him. The antidote to belief is reality. The believer when faced with reality must ignore it in order for belief to be maintained. Of course it matters not that Christians unanimously agree that God has intervened with suffering. The fact is they are wrong. This is merely a belief they hold. It is not a truth. It has no more validity than Muslims unanimously agreeing that Mohammad flew to heaven on a winged horse. Truth isn’t measured by unanimity. Christians used to be unanimous in believing that the earth was a few thousand years old and flat. I must express surprise at your claim that most babies become healthy men and women, physically speaking. This is not a view based on a study of history. (See Volk & Atkinson, 2008;. Volk, 2011) The fact that most babies survive today has nothing whatsoever to do with the Christian God but is down to scientific advances by mankind. There is nothing to celebrate about victories by your God when it comes to the survival of children. In fact the history of your God in the Old Testament is a history of God slaughtering them. Whether it’s sin as a problem for us to resolve or God giving us moral freewill and discretion or us having a job on our hands to resist the devil these are all merely beliefs which you hold. And they are all beliefs based on religious conditioning brought about by a geographical accident of birth. They most certainly are not truths. As I’ve said many times before; all the believer can offer is their beliefs and quotations from scripture. They do not offer credible evidence or explanations because they do not have any to offer. Matt10 I think you’re a head case. As for myself, I will continue to interpret the world recognizing believers, their faith in their heavenly home and their contributions. You may think I’m a head case but once again you offer no evidence or explanation. You merely state what you believe without any supporting evidence. That is the lot of the religious believer. I suspect your thinking on this is as a flawed as your thinking on the nature of God. However I recognise your frustration at being unable to counteract the arguments made. Religious beliefs flourish best when in the company of fellow believers but they tend to wither when subject to scrutiny. Not for nothing the 2x2s refuse to debate their doctrine. Not for nothing there are few professing people here. The TMB is the vine upon which religious beliefs wither which is why the trend is clearly from belief to unbelief here rather than the other way round. Believers have a weak hand and generally play it badly hence they are often found engaging at the bottom of the Pyramid of Debate as you have here. Matt10 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 15, 2020 1:55:25 GMT -5
Exceptionally good reference.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Oct 15, 2020 2:48:30 GMT -5
I think you’re a head case. As for myself, I will continue to interpret the world recognizing believers, their faith in their heavenly home and their contributions. You may think I’m a head case but once again you offer no evidence or explanation. You merely state what you believe without any supporting evidence. That is the lot of the religious believer. I suspect your thinking on this is as a flawed as your thinking on the nature of God. However I recognise your frustration at being unable to counteract the arguments made. Religious beliefs flourish best when in the company of fellow believers but they tend to wither when subject to scrutiny. Not for nothing the 2x2s refuse to debate their doctrine. Not for nothing there are few professing people here. The TMB is the vine upon which religious beliefs wither which is why the trend is clearly from belief to unbelief here rather than the other way round. Believers have a weak hand and generally play it badly hence they are often found engaging at the bottom of the Pyramid of Debate as you have here. Matt10 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svgI have never been able to understand why a god believer would enter into a debate to prove their belief. They have faith in their belief. For that faith to be strong there must not be questions about that faith. Once they start running around dredging up pseusdo science then it is obvious their faith is weak and they are looking to legitimize it. They would be better off practicing the Mona Lisa smile.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Oct 15, 2020 6:11:45 GMT -5
You may think I’m a head case but once again you offer no evidence or explanation. You merely state what you believe without any supporting evidence. That is the lot of the religious believer. I suspect your thinking on this is as a flawed as your thinking on the nature of God. However I recognise your frustration at being unable to counteract the arguments made. Religious beliefs flourish best when in the company of fellow believers but they tend to wither when subject to scrutiny. Not for nothing the 2x2s refuse to debate their doctrine. Not for nothing there are few professing people here. The TMB is the vine upon which religious beliefs wither which is why the trend is clearly from belief to unbelief here rather than the other way round. Believers have a weak hand and generally play it badly hence they are often found engaging at the bottom of the Pyramid of Debate as you have here. Matt10 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svgI have never been able to understand why a god believer would enter into a debate to prove their belief. They have faith in their belief. For that faith to be strong there must not be questions about that faith. Once they start running around dredging up pseusdo science then it is obvious their faith is weak and they are looking to legitimize it. They would be better off practicing the Mona Lisa smile. That hit home. I don't explain what I believe to anyone. Why should I? They work for me and that's all that matters. It's like I tell my dad, I've spent 63 forming my beliefs. Do you have 63 years to listen to my story?
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Oct 15, 2020 7:25:16 GMT -5
I think you’re a head case. As for myself, I will continue to interpret the world recognizing believers, their faith in their heavenly home and their contributions. You may think I’m a head case but once again you offer no evidence or explanation. You merely state what you believe without any supporting evidence. That is the lot of the religious believer. I suspect your thinking on this is as a flawed as your thinking on the nature of God. However I recognise your frustration at being unable to counteract the arguments made. Religious beliefs flourish best when in the company of fellow believers but they tend to wither when subject to scrutiny. Not for nothing the 2x2s refuse to debate their doctrine. Not for nothing there are few professing people here. The TMB is the vine upon which religious beliefs wither which is why the trend is clearly from belief to unbelief here rather than the other way round. Believers have a weak hand and generally play it badly hence they are often found engaging at the bottom of the Pyramid of Debate as you have here. Matt10 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg I agree With you that IF a believers or unbelievers motive is to convert others to Their “way of thinking “, arguing with anonymous posters with “I am right- you are wrong “ attitude is considered a waste of time for many people ,so they simply leave forums like tmb And carry on , I also agree with you that If , a believers motive is to be strengthened In their faith , tmb is not a good place for that , as you mentioned the tendency is from belief to unbelief. Conversely, I suppose if a person motive is to be strengthened in their unbelief position ,then avoid “situations” that might lead to “belief” A study below pointed to 10 “ “themes” that lead to belief From unbelief . Alvin Interesting research -https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327078804_Toward_Faith_A_Qualitative_Study_of_How_Atheists_Convert_to_Christianity Abstract The study of religious conversion has historically neglected how nonbelievers (i.e. atheists) come to adopt a belief in a god or gods, and thus cannot address whether findings and theories from previous research apply to atheists. In order to assess how atheists converted to Christianity, we performed a thematic analysis of 111 biographical narratives obtained from the open Internet. Our analysis yielded 10 recurring thematic elements, which we termed as hardship; authentic example; unfamiliarity/pseudo-familiarity (with Christianity or Christians); “contra atheism”; religious study; intellectualism; numinous experiences; openness to experience; ritual behaviors; and social ties. We draw logical connections between these themes and connect them to previous research. Our results impress the need for a more flexible, and therefore less sequential or stage-based, theoretical approach to conversion. www.researchgate.net/publication/327078804_Toward_Faith_A_Qualitative_Study_of_How_Atheists_Convert_to_Christianity
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 8:29:49 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 8:52:38 GMT -5
You may think I’m a head case but once again you offer no evidence or explanation. You merely state what you believe without any supporting evidence. That is the lot of the religious believer. I suspect your thinking on this is as a flawed as your thinking on the nature of God. However I recognise your frustration at being unable to counteract the arguments made. Religious beliefs flourish best when in the company of fellow believers but they tend to wither when subject to scrutiny. Not for nothing the 2x2s refuse to debate their doctrine. Not for nothing there are few professing people here. The TMB is the vine upon which religious beliefs wither which is why the trend is clearly from belief to unbelief here rather than the other way round. Believers have a weak hand and generally play it badly hence they are often found engaging at the bottom of the Pyramid of Debate as you have here. Matt10 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg I agree With you that IF a believers or unbelievers motive is to convert others to Their “way of thinking “, arguing with anonymous posters with “I am right- you are wrong “ attitude is considered a waste of time for many people ,so they simply leave forums like tmb And carry on , I also agree with you that If , a believers motive is to be strengthened In their faith , tmb is not a good place for that , as you mentioned the tendency is from belief to unbelief. Conversely, I suppose if a person motive is to be strengthened in their unbelief position ,then avoid “situations” that might lead to “belief” A study below pointed to 10 “ “themes” that lead to belief From unbelief . Alvin Interesting research -https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327078804_Toward_Faith_A_Qualitative_Study_of_How_Atheists_Convert_to_Christianity Abstract The study of religious conversion has historically neglected how nonbelievers (i.e. atheists) come to adopt a belief in a god or gods, and thus cannot address whether findings and theories from previous research apply to atheists. In order to assess how atheists converted to Christianity, we performed a thematic analysis of 111 biographical narratives obtained from the open Internet. Our analysis yielded 10 recurring thematic elements, which we termed as hardship; authentic example; unfamiliarity/pseudo-familiarity (with Christianity or Christians); “contra atheism”; religious study; intellectualism; numinous experiences; openness to experience; ritual behaviors; and social ties. We draw logical connections between these themes and connect them to previous research. Our results impress the need for a more flexible, and therefore less sequential or stage-based, theoretical approach to conversion. www.researchgate.net/publication/327078804_Toward_Faith_A_Qualitative_Study_of_How_Atheists_Convert_to_ChristianityThanks for posting that. An interesting read. The thing that jumped out at me was the following; “ We cannot be sure that the narrators only temporarily considered themselves as atheists during what was otherwise a period of religious doubt between two phases of possessing a belief in God.” I’ve heard many claims about “atheists” who have subsequently become Christians but I have never met one. However I have heard of “atheists” who subsequently became Christians who turned out to have been raised as Christians and therefore had likely already been subject to the levels of religious indoctrination necessary to create the concept of the Christian God in their mind. Whether the concept ever really went away may be open to question. Personally I fail to understand how one who has come to a true understanding of the nature of God, a non believer by conscious decision based on the evidence rather than one merely as a result of circumstance, could ever revert to believing in a God for which they have overwhelming evidence isn’t there. Matt10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 11:33:26 GMT -5
I have never been able to understand why a god believer would enter into a debate to prove their belief. They have faith in their belief. For that faith to be strong there must not be questions about that faith. Once they start running around dredging up pseusdo science then it is obvious their faith is weak and they are looking to legitimize it. They would be better off practicing the Mona Lisa smile. That hit home. I don't explain what I believe to anyone. Why should I? They work for me and that's all that matters. It's like I tell my dad, I've spent 63 forming my beliefs. Do you have 63 years to listen to my story? Hitchens once chastised Turek in a debate with the line: "Look, do yourself and your faith the honor of saying it's faith". Like many of Hitchens' comments, that one is much deeper than meets the ear.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Oct 15, 2020 11:36:54 GMT -5
Thanks Matt,
There are a lot of “angry” theists and atheists it seems like , and probably for “good” reasons , but sure makes for a lot of polarization . I imagine our 2x2 background , still influences us to a degree , in that we need things to be “black and white , no allowance for “grey” , and unprovable questions need to be decided on and defended , as opposed to “ holding them in tension “? Personally , if I hear an angry religious preacher , or angry atheist, “pounding the table “ , it weakens the messsge they are trying to promote . Alvin
If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table."
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Oct 17, 2020 5:22:45 GMT -5
Have you ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, “Self, what might salvation be? Lee, -have YOU ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, "Self, -just exactly what are these sins that I have committed that I need to be delivered from?"
Then Lee, have YOU ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, "Self, what will happen to me if I am NOT "saved from those so called "sins?"
Next comes the question to oneself , " Am I not being selfish that I should believe and rely on someone else, -in this case Jesus, -an innocent person to die a horrible death just to "save " me from the consequences of my errors but shouldn't I instead recognize my mistakes and work in the future to correct them myself?"
How does a person undo a mistake? The error has been made, its a done deal. All a person can do is repent of a mistake and attempt not to repeat it.
Jesus covered the consequences of our mistakes (sins), because we could not. The repercussions of sin was paid, its a done deal.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 17, 2020 12:24:55 GMT -5
Have you ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, “Self, what might salvation be? Saved from what? Saved from the scene of sin that characterizes so much of the human condition. Saved from your own sins. Saved from idolatry. Some things are getting better in the world, some worse. There is light in the world, but darkness is always plotting. Increasingly, the battle between good and evil will be more political.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 17, 2020 12:30:50 GMT -5
Saved from burning for all eternity in the imaginary hell which the religious indoctrination of your childhood led you to believe was real. You can read about recovering from the fear of hell as a result of childhood religious indoctrination at the link below. Matt10 lifeafterdogma.org/2020/06/30/hell-trauma/Perhaps hell has been over preached by persons resulting in hasty conversions to fear over faith. On the other hand hell is a place people go when they linger too long in their unreasonableness, and other things.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 17, 2020 12:39:05 GMT -5
I think you’re a head case. As for myself, I will continue to interpret the world recognizing believers, their faith in their heavenly home and their contributions. You may think I’m a head case but once again you offer no evidence or explanation. You merely state what you believe without any supporting evidence. That is the lot of the religious believer. I suspect your thinking on this is as a flawed as your thinking on the nature of God. However I recognise your frustration at being unable to counteract the arguments made. Religious beliefs flourish best when in the company of fellow believers but they tend to wither when subject to scrutiny. Not for nothing the 2x2s refuse to debate their doctrine. Not for nothing there are few professing people here. The TMB is the vine upon which religious beliefs wither which is why the trend is clearly from belief to unbelief here rather than the other way round. Believers have a weak hand and generally play it badly hence they are often found engaging at the bottom of the Pyramid of Debate as you have here. Matt10 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg No. Rather you won’t accept as evidence of God and Jesus what is reasonably presented as evidence: Life itself, creation. Religion, belief in God and the Good The enlightenment and reformation. Government, as expressed in the US constitution: that government should be of the people. You are the one who is polarized, and pounding the table. In the interest of truth, -you say you’re a man of truth, these evidences will be considered.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 17, 2020 12:52:12 GMT -5
Have you ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, “Self, what might salvation be? Lee, -have YOU ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, "Self, -just exactly what are these sins that I have committed that I need to be delivered from?"
Then Lee, have YOU ever had a conversation with yourself and asked yourself, "Self, what will happen to me if I am NOT "saved from those so called "sins?"
Next comes the question to oneself , " Am I not being selfish that I should believe and rely on someone else, -in this case Jesus, -an innocent person to die a horrible death just to "save " me from the consequences of my errors but shouldn't I instead recognize my mistakes and work in the future to correct them myself?"
We should work on ourselves but I’m not so naive to believe I will be sinless this side of the grave and perhaps not even then. “He finds fault in his servants and angels Job 4:18 No, there’s no sin in supposing his death satisfied gods justice. Man couldn’t improve himself by himself. He needed his sins defined and enumerated before he could improve and at last, he needed to do this with grace and truth. So long as death was the end of a man as far as we knew, one might have said “Who cares about sin, or What does it matter”. One might have justified his sin as a kind of revenge against death’s tyranny as it appeared to befall all men as one. No longer. We were made for eternal life and have been promised it. We will not surrender our heavenly homes quickly.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Oct 17, 2020 13:38:58 GMT -5
"When we drink, we get drunk. When we get drunk, we fall asleep. When we fall asleep, we commit no sin. When we commit no sin, we go to heaven. So, let's all get drunk and go to heaven!" ~ George Bernard Shaw
Freedom is the very breath of existence. Without the "sin" of freedom, there would be no philosophers, no art, no science, no cities, no marketplaces, no gaiety, no joyfulness, no naughtiness, no explorations, no music, no excitements, no sudden songs in the morning, no laughter at midnight, no spicy dishes, no wine, and, of course, no wars and no books. Perhaps sin in its deepest meanings is truth." ~ Bright Flows the River, Taylor Caldwell
|
|