rehmwa 2
Recommended Posts
QuoteI'm agnostic, (I just really don't care). But that paragraph shows a misunderstanding of the concept of faith. Faith is predicated on the fact that there is NO PROOF - it's the definition. So the only reason to ask for proof, is just to be obnoxious and insensitive to the basis of the other's belief.
Whether faith is based on reality or is just a comfy blanky or placebo doesn't really matter. It's the effect it has on the faithful (each individual, not any group, etc) that I watch. As for the effect it has on cynical large organizations, well, they are all eventually become crooked, so what if it's a 'church' or a political party, or a PC global effort, etc.
Can one "prove" God? I think it depends on your presuppositions. I presuppose God created the universe out of nothing. Is there proof of that? I believe there is both in the creation and our consciences bearing witness to his moral law. There is great complexity and obvious design in the universe. It is evident to me that there must have been a designer. If you don't presuppose that, they you must presuppose that something came from nothing, blew up, and on its own became an organized everything. However, I disagree with the Intelligent Design movement by itself. Intelligent Design does not take into account the personal aspect of God and His relationship with us. God purposed to make himself known to us not only through the creation and our consciences (general revelation) but also through His written word (special revelation). Is faith required to believe in God? Absolutely! You will not be saved apart from it. However, it is not faith without reason. God didn't leave us in the dark with no way out. The problem with people is they like the darkness.
rehmwa 2
QuoteCan one "prove" God? I think it depends on your presuppositions. I presuppose God created the universe out of nothing. Is there proof of that? I believe there is both in the creation and our consciences bearing witness to his moral law. There is great complexity and obvious design in the universe. It is evident to me that there must have been a designer. If you don't presuppose that, they you must presuppose that something came from nothing, blew up, and on its own became an organized everything. However, I disagree with the Intelligent Design movement by itself. Intelligent Design does not take into account the personal aspect of God and His relationship with us. God purposed to make himself known to us not only through the creation and our consciences (general revelation) but also through His written word (special revelation). Is faith required to believe in God? Absolutely! You will not be saved apart from it. However, it is not faith without reason. God didn't leave us in the dark with no way out. The problem with people is they like the darkness.
I think it depends
I presuppose
I believe
It is evident to me
If you don't presuppose that, they you must presuppose
I disagree with t
Is faith required to believe in God? Absolutely!
it is not faith without reason.
so there's some key cuts - I took out the preaching that doesn't apply. you'd be better off not putting all that chaff in unless your just 'preaching to the choir' rather than debating with open minded opponents. It's just makes most of us turn off in boredom.
clearly - faith without proof is demonstrated in your own words. if you need to 'reason' or 'rationalize' you underpinning of your faith, then you are still a doubter somewhere, but doing the best you can. But "reason" <> "proof", and in this context, it's more 'rationalization' - and there is nothing wrong with that in terms of subjective belief systems. Rationalization in a good context, not negative.
Once believers just accept that it CAN'T be proven and just acknowledge that they believe regardless, then that's the truth, and there's nothing wrong with that and more power to you if it's a positive force for you and those around you.
most cynics here don't have an issue with 'faith', it's really the abuse of the organization that exploit the faithful, and the individuals that misuse their beliefs to abuse (subtly) those around them. I find the organization aspect to be typical regardless of origin, and those types of individuals to be the exception (highly visible) and NOT the norm (quietly all around us)
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Quoteso there's some key cuts - I took out the preaching that doesn't apply. you'd be better off not putting all that chaff in unless your just 'preaching to the choir' rather than debating with open minded opponents. It's just makes most of us turn off in boredom.
I'd prefer that you just took what I say at face value even if you disagree with it instead of picking out words to fit your purposes. I'm certain that you probably misrepresent scripture in the same manner.
Quoteclearly - faith without proof is demonstrated in your own words. if you need to 'reason' or 'rationalize' you underpinning of your faith, then you are still a doubter somewhere, but doing the best you can. But "reason" <> "proof", and in this context, it's more 'rationalization' - and there is nothing wrong with that in terms of subjective belief systems. Rationalization in a good context, not negative.
I never disagreed that faith is required. I just disagree with you that there's no reason behind it. What you're describing is blind faith. That, I do not have. Fortunately, God doesn't leave us with that.
QuoteOnce believers just accept that it CAN'T be proven and just acknowledge that they believe regardless, then that's the truth, and there's nothing wrong with that and more power to you if it's a positive force for you and those around you.
And what I'm pointing out is that you take a faith position yourself. You must presuppose that everything came from nothing, blew up, and organized itself into what we see today. You can't prove that either but that is your starting point. Everyone's got to put faith in something. You place yours in yourself and blind luck. I place mine in God.
Quotemost cynics here don't have an issue with 'faith', it's really the abuse of the organization that exploit the faithful, and the individuals that misuse their beliefs to abuse (subtly) those around them. I find the organization aspect to be typical regardless of origin, and those types of individuals to be the exception (highly visible) and NOT the norm (quietly all around us)
I understand completely. I think there is much abuse in the system of religion (the Roman Catholic Church is a great example. However, what evil men do with religion has nothing to do with the validity of God or what He says.
devildog 0
I agree. That's why I stopped being an atheist :)Quote
I also really question those that ignore science because their faith says something different...The "True Believers" hate the question "Why?" They usually only have the "Because I Said So" answer (or "Becuase I Was Told So And You Should Believe It Too").
You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.
QuoteI also really question those that ignore science because their faith says something different.
I question those who ignore real science (operational science)...what we can see, demonstrate, falsify, "prove." I also REALLY question those who ignore what God clearly says and replace it with humanistic, evolutionary foundational thinking based on "historical" science which can't be proven. Although, I do think they have great faith...in themselves...and some blind force.
QuoteI also REALLY question those who ignore what God clearly says
...and therin lies the rub.
"Science, logic and reason will fly you to the moon. Religion will fly you into buildings."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
rehmwa 2
QuoteI'm certain that you probably misrepresent scripture in the same manner. defensive much? I'm actually on your side to the point that I consider you are being unfairly poke at with sticks and I don't see why. and I noted they were "key cuts" of your text - absolutely true and not misleading
What you're describing is blind faith. That, I do not have. Fortunately, God doesn't leave us with that. nonsense - "faith" and "blind faith" are the exact same thing, "blind faith" is just a disparaging way of portraying someone with strong beliefs, if you feel you require proof, then your faith is weak - by definition. Faith is completely different than science - they can both exist together. Believers don't have "faith with reason", they have "faith" and find ways to self validate that in their everyday lives. And there is nothing wrong with that
And what I'm pointing out is that you take a faith position yourself. You place yours in yourself and blind luck. I place mine in God.
I have no issue with this paragraph. It seems that I respect your choice to choose your source of reassurance, but you can't do the same for me. That's a problem IMO.
Yes I truncated to keep this post short. Interesting in your choice of words "blind luck" in comparison to your negative reaction to the term "blind faith"......
I understand completely. I think there is much abuse in the system of religion (the Roman Catholic Church is a great example. However, what evil men do with religion has nothing to do with the validity of God or what He says. ok - merely a 'faithful' persons way of repeating what I said, but in a personally validating his faith way - as is natural. .
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
rehmwa 2
QuoteQuoteI also REALLY question those who ignore what God clearly says
...and therin lies the rub.
in this post, I'm with Steve. If a faithful person wants their personal, subjective beliefs respected, they have to do the same for those of a different belief system as well.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
To answer the OP...
If Jesus didn't die on the cross, then the "true believers" would just pull something else out of their ass to explain away the things they don't understand.
If Jesus didn't die on the cross, then the "true believers" would just pull something else out of their ass to explain away the things they don't understand.
"Science, logic and reason will fly you to the moon. Religion will fly you into buildings."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
wolfriverjoe 1,340
QuoteQuoteThe "True Believers" hate the question "Why?" They usually only have the "Because I Said So" answer (or "Becuase I Was Told So And You Should Believe It Too"). I'm still waiting for an answer as to why the Bible is literally, factually true. I asked the question repeatedly in a now deleted thread and never got an answer.
I'm agnostic, (I just really don't care). But that paragraph shows a misunderstanding of the concept of faith. Faith is predicated on the fact that there is NO PROOF - it's the definition. So the only reason to ask for proof, is just to be obnoxious and insensitive to the basis of the other's belief.
Whether faith is based on reality or is just a comfy blanky or placebo doesn't really matter. It's the effect it has on the faithful (each individual, not any group, etc) that I watch. As for the effect it has on cynical large organizations, well, they are all eventually become crooked, so what if it's a 'church' or a political party, or a PC global effort, etc.
No, you misunderstand my asking "Why?" There is a poster on here who has faith in Jesus because he believes Jesus appeared before him and "Saved" him. I'm cool with that. He has what he believes to be an authentic spritiual experience to base his faith and beliefs on.
I personally have experienced a number of "miracles." I base my faith and beliefs on those. They are entirely subjective. They are my experiences. I don't try to convert others to my way of thinking because they haven't experieneced the same miracles that I have. My experiences can be summed up by the restaurant scene in Pulp Fiction. Jump to 1:25 to hear Jules's description of a miracle.
There isn't any "Proof." And I'm not asking for any. I am asking why people believe what they do. I've repeatedly asked why a particular poster believes that the Bible is literally, factually true and why science is wrong. But I have yet to hear an answer.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy
"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
Here's a question for everybody on here that would fall into anything other than the "believer" category. This isn't meant to stir up more crazy debate, but more just to satisfy my own curiousity to questions within my own faith.
Ok, completely theoretical, but If Jesus busted through the sky today and there were no doubts who he was based on perhaps his entrance, and he just said "Hey, heads up everybody, but everything you read about me in the bible is true, and I'm coming back soon. Repent and follow me," then poof he's gone and life as we know it is just as its always been other than your new found knowledge...
Would you decide to follow Him?
Would you still reject following regardless if you knew he was the "real deal?"
So basically if there was 100% undeniable proof that Jesus is the Son of God, would it make a difference to what you "believe", other than a basic acknowledgement of "Yep, there's a God."
Ok, completely theoretical, but If Jesus busted through the sky today and there were no doubts who he was based on perhaps his entrance, and he just said "Hey, heads up everybody, but everything you read about me in the bible is true, and I'm coming back soon. Repent and follow me," then poof he's gone and life as we know it is just as its always been other than your new found knowledge...
Would you decide to follow Him?
Would you still reject following regardless if you knew he was the "real deal?"
So basically if there was 100% undeniable proof that Jesus is the Son of God, would it make a difference to what you "believe", other than a basic acknowledgement of "Yep, there's a God."
kallend 1,621
QuoteThen all His first disciples suffered and died believing a lie. Not likely!
Half of the NT is a lie anyway.
religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says/
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
jimbrown 0
QuoteBefore we ask ourselves this question maybe we should ask if he existed in the first place. There is no (zero) secular evidence for the existence of JC. Ancient books and parables written by different authors (who never actually met him), at different times, with different agendas do not count as evidence and should not be taken literally. I say I DO NOT KNOW. His story follows the same story as many birth-death-rebirth deities who too never existed, only in myth. We can then ask, "Why is the story of JC so prominent"? Maybe it's because those who did not believe in this story were tortured, murdered, and forced to believe from 300 years following his death until about, ummmm, today (Hi, it's God. Worship me or I'll torture you forever. Love, God, I mean Jesus, I mean the Holy Spirit.... ummm, just love me alright). Could the man as a teacher existed, sure. Until there is hard evidence for biblical heros, such as JC, Moses and David, I will remain a skeptic to any story that was written by men, altered countless times over many, many centuries, interpreted, re-interpreted, and re-interpreted over and over, and influenced by multiple cultures by men with their own political and financial agenda. As science/history/academia (which too should be approached with skepticism) shows us today, there is a huge difference in what people believe and what happened historically based on EVIDENCE
My research indicates that there was such a man . His name was actually Moses Moriah El . He did achieve the Christ initiation.
He didn't die on the cross as evidenced by people seeing and talking to him after the cruci fiction.
He was buried in Shri Lanka many years later.
He wasn't born as God or atleast no more than all of us are(his teaching).
He was human but did complete the course of education which entitled him Christ.
Peace,
Jim B
jimbrown 0
Quote
a radical philosopher who pissed off some Romans and got crucified for it.Quote
My research indicates that he didn't piss off the Romans so much but rather the Jewish priests(he taught the people didn't need them inorder to have a direct relationship with God cutting into the priests' profits) and the money lenders (cutting into their profits).
Peace,
Jim B
jimbrown 0
QuoteThe Romans love killing Jews...Just look at Constantine, that S.O.B!
Quote
The Roman Empire achieved greatness by assimiliating people of foreign lands.
"Love Killing Jews"?
From where do you get that morsel of information?
Peace,
Jim B
jimbrown 0
QuoteHe wasn't dying quick enough so they stab the dude on the side.
No shit his heart was still pumping at the time, and that is why they stab the dude to haste the death.
Your question has the answer.
Breaking the legs was the commom practice to hasten the death of those crucified.
Ya' see , the position of the crucified man puts most of the blood down in the lower extremities and the heart has a hard time pumping it back up to the brain.
The Biblical account is that the other two victims had their legs broken but not Jesus.
Now back to the heart not being able to efficiently pump the blood from the lower extremities to the brain. Can you guess what might happen?
Have you ever been forced to stand at attention for an extended period of time? Same concept.
You might not have passed out but I'll bet some of your comrades did.
And soon after they were laid straight out on the ground the blood went back to their brain and they were fine . Maybe a bit headachey but really pretty much fine.
Was that the fate of Moses Moriah -El?
My research indicates that was the case.
So mote it Be.
Peace,
Jim B
jimbrown 0
QuoteQuoteHe wasn't dying quick enough so they stab the dude on the side.
No shit his heart was still pumping at the time, and that is why they stab the dude to haste the death.
Your question has the answer.
If He wasn't dying quickly enough, they break legs. The stabbing was just to see if he was dead ( blood and water indicates the blood is separated due to lack of circulation= dead, which at the time was the definitive way of determining so)
Of course again we must contend with the dilema of a healthy man who walked everywhere , ate mostly figs ,olives,dates,and fish dying within three hours from basiclly what today we would call a "stress position".
Death by crucifiction normally would take a week or more so why should we suppose this healthy man would be clinically dead in a mere three hours?
Peace,
Jim B
QuoteI'm still waiting for an answer as to why the Bible is literally, factually true. I asked the question repeatedly in a now deleted thread and never got an answer.
Maybe because it was written by man and none of us are infallible?
Maybe because different parts were written by different people at different places and times not knowing what the other guys wrote?
QuoteAnd I question the hypocrites, especially those who proclaim their faith in Jesus, and how they have been "SAVED" by him, yet are willing to do some pretty ugly things to their fellow humans because of
"war"anything.
I took it one step farther.
At the same time, I question why anyone would do those things....or any reason. Well, to be honest, I do think it's OK to defend yourself.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
QuoteQuoteThen all His first disciples suffered and died believing a lie. Not likely!
Half of the NT is a lie anyway.
religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says/
We are supposed to take that as definitive?
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
jimbrown 0
Quote
At the same time, I question why anyone would do those things....or any reason. Well, to be honest, I do think it's OK to defend yourself.
According to the Master, Jesus the Christ , all is ok. The only one who needs to forgive you and the only one from whom you can recieve true forgiveness is yourself.
Judgement is also rightfully a self-reserved function.
Peace,
Jim B
Shotgun 1
QuoteHere's a question for everybody on here that would fall into anything other than the "believer" category. . .
If I had a personal experience that convinced me that one of the religions was "right" regarding the existence and nature of a god(s), then yes, I would change my beliefs. But I don't think I'll hold my breath waiting for that to happen.
QuoteI'm agnostic, (I just really don't care). But that paragraph shows a misunderstanding of the concept of faith. Faith is predicated on the fact that there is NO PROOF - it's the definition. So the only reason to ask for proof, is just to be obnoxious and insensitive to the basis of the other's belief.
Whether faith is based on reality or is just a comfy blanky or placebo doesn't really matter. It's the effect it has on the faithful (each individual, not any group, etc) that I watch. As for the effect it has on cynical large organizations, well, they are all eventually become crooked, so what if it's a 'church' or a political party, or a PC global effort, etc.
Wow! Just WOW!
What a powerful and honest post, rhemwa!Guys, now THIS is a real post...no whining, no bitching, no BS....just an honest statement of personal philosophy.
My hat is off to you for this post.
Now don't go getting a big head. You still post a lot of BS on other topics.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
jimbrown 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteThen all His first disciples suffered and died believing a lie. Not likely!
Half of the NT is a lie anyway.
religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says/
We are supposed to take that as definitive?
My research indicates that the Old Testament was rewritten by Ezra around 400 BC .
He made changes to the text which had the effect of declaring the Jews as Gods' "chosen people".
Obviously a forgery and a lie.
If you have all these children would you,could you, choose one of them over the others?
The new testament was basicly put to paper during the Nicean Council by Pope Constantine around 300 AD.
He had his own political reasons for what was included and what was excluded.
The Professor is partially correct.
My research indicates his calculations are off by only about 49.99%.
Peace,
Jim B
I'm agnostic, (I just really don't care). But that paragraph shows a misunderstanding of the concept of faith. Faith is predicated on the fact that there is NO PROOF - it's the definition. So the only reason to ask for proof, is just to be obnoxious and insensitive to the basis of the other's belief.
Whether faith is based on reality or is just a comfy blanky or placebo doesn't really matter. It's the effect it has on the faithful (each individual, not any group, etc) that I watch. As for the effect it has on cynical large organizations, well, they are all eventually become crooked, so what if it's a 'church' or a political party, or a PC global effort, etc.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites