Difficulty on Noah's Flood?

Originally posted by chaney3
Hey Dive, we've discussed this before. And the new rule, according to His Majesty FMF, is for you to review past threads.
Sorry, I would like to have answered.

You - of all people - should not not be encouraging anyone to go back and see what you posted in the past, how you claimed things about yourself which you later contradicted, and how you behaved towards people generally. You have obviously misunderstood my comment about how I have tired of answering your exact same question repeatedly again only to see you ignore it.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I agree that choosing to believe is the end game of a long process of introspection and evaluation. But eventually, a choice is made.

So do you think that, after the "long process of introspection and evaluation", in which a belief forms and takes hold of one's thoughts, that the person - having realized they have acquired the new belief - can, nevertheless then "choose" not to believe it? Of course they can't. They could "choose" to deny it to others. They could "choose" to not act upon their belief. But to suggest that they could somehow "choose" not to believe it sounds completely inauthentic.

Similarly, with someone like me, do you seriously think that, having gradually lost my belief in the various tenets that comprised and sustained my faith, when I eventually realized that I no longer believed what I used to believe, that I could have nevertheless then have "chosen" to just believe it all anyway? Again, of course I couldn't. I could "choose" to keep telling others that I still believed the same things. I could "choose" to continue to behave in the same way as when I had the belief. But to suggest that I could somehow "choose" to continue to believe the same things just sounds completely unrealistic.

Originally posted by FMF
You - of all people - should not not be encouraging anyone to go back and see what you posted in the past, how you claimed things about yourself which you later contradicted, and how you behaved towards people generally. You have obviously misunderstood my comment about how I have tired of answering your exact same question repeatedly again only to see you ignore it.

"Don't let the past remind us of what we are not now".
Crosby, Stills and Nash

I post much differently now FMF.

The 'majesty' thing was just a joke.

Originally posted by chaney3
I post much differently now FMF.

Then you certainly shouldn't be suggesting to people that they trawl back through the raw abuse and untrue things you used to come out with.

Originally posted by FMF
Then you certainly shouldn't be suggesting to people that they trawl back through the raw abuse and untrue things you used to come out with.

You're pretty good at raw abuse FMF. Stop painting yourself as such a delightful character!
And get off the pulpit while you're at it.

Originally posted by chaney3
You're pretty good at raw abuse FMF. Stop painting yourself as such a delightful character!
And get off the pulpit while you're at it.

I am irritating to some because I get right to the point in a way that makes ideologues and superstitious people uncomfortable, and when they say something that is incoherent or contradicts itself, I pursue it. I don't do "raw abuse". And I never have. You cannot find any examples of it.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Does your evidence need to be peer-reviewed or is your take on it enough?

I believe things that I have become convinced are true. Sometimes this is a result of my own observations and reasoning, and more often than not based on the observations and reasoning of people far smarter than I.

Originally posted by chaney3
Hey Dive, we've discussed this before. And the new rule, according to His Majesty FMF, is for you to review past threads.
Sorry, I would like to have answered.

No need. In a past thread you have claimed to have always been a christian, in another you said you had never been a Christian, and in yet another to deny both of the above. So I'm just wondering if today you have a position on whether you have been or are a Christian?

Originally posted by FMF
The ideology of immortality that I have heard you propagate is that all that one has to do to be "saved" - and thus go on to an "afterlife" - is to "decide" or "choose" to believe in Jesus.

This is absolutely central to the notion of "salvation" that people like you, Grampy Bobby and sonship put forward here week in week out.

However, in reality, people ...[text shortened]... for it to be so and not by the actual nature of belief or how we arrive at belief or disbelief.

Of course it is. I laid out my points to this earlier, which you, since you disagree, decided to "poo-poo" as insubstantial.

I've already detailed how people can believe one thing fervently for decades and then suddenly find themselves on the other end of the stick. This happens all the time and it even happened to you. Clearly, it IS possible to believe one thing and then to believe something else entirely, something which one did not believe earlier. Change happens. People are not digital, beliefs are not often "on" or "off". One's beliefs may literally be anywhere on a spectrum of belief, and once their end of the spectrum reaches critical mass, which is determined only by them, they realize they have made the choice soon after they reach that critical breakpoint which is usually defined by their own belief spectrum. This is clearly what free will is all about and whether one's attitude towards change can even allow motion on the spectrum at all. But the spectrum itself in defined by that person's beliefs, and so it is impossible to keep choice completely out of it.

And you do me a disservice if you think you can walk in here and define my spectrum by your beliefs. What you are saying, basically, is that my beliefs somehow inform my education on this topic, and that this also somehow invalidates either my beliefs or my education.

Frankly, you should have stopped while you were at least being reasonable. I could accept your initial argument as "just your opinion" on the matter and leave it there, but your insistence on making this somehow the fault of my ideology just shows your bias against my ideology and convinces me that you just don't know what you're talking about.

Originally posted by chaney3
"Don't let the past remind us of what we are not now".
Crosby, Stills and Nash

This is a great song, one of CS&N's best.

Originally posted by Suzianne
This is a great song, one of CS&N's best.

Agreed, along with 'Southern Cross'. Thanks.

Your above description of how a person's belief system can change or 'fluctuate' over time is well stated.......something I hope Dive takes the time to read. It helps to explain my battles with spirituality and how I currently label myself, which is simply a believer in God.
Edit: A person should not be criticized or put down for changes or modifications to what or how they believe, it's part of the spiritual journey.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Frankly, you should have stopped while you were at least being reasonable. I could accept your initial argument as "just your opinion" on the matter and leave it there, but your insistence on making this somehow the fault of my ideology just shows your bias against my ideology and convinces me that you just don't know what you're talking about.

Christians who believe that immortality and "salvation" are merely attained through a "decision" or "choice" to believe in Christ need to assert that such a belief can be chosen or can result from a decision, otherwise their ideology is incoherent. On the other hand, I believe that such an assertion displays a fundamental misconception of the nature of belief and the process through which people arrive at their beliefs. This is why I think your error in this matter is driven by your ideology.

Originally posted by chaney3
A person should not be criticized or put down for changes or modifications to what or how they believe, it's part of the spiritual journey.

Any criticism you have received has been because you have made untrue statements about yourself in public and because you have been abusive to people who have engaged you (perhaps more so than anyone else I can remember on this forum).

Changes or modifications to what or how you believe are fine. I cannot remember a single instance of you being "criticized or put down" for such things.

Originally posted by Suzianne
And you do me a disservice if you think you can walk in here and define my spectrum by your beliefs. What you are saying, basically, is that my beliefs somehow inform my education on this topic, and that this also somehow invalidates either my beliefs or my education..

Disagreeing with you, and being absolutely clear as to why, cannot be described as "a disservice" on a debate and discussion forum.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Clearly, it IS possible to believe one thing and then to believe something else entirely, something which one did not believe earlier. Change happens.

Of course "change happens". Of course "it is possible to believe one thing and then to believe something else". No one disputes these things. But it's something that happens - as you say - it's a process, it's a realization, it's an impact that evidence and circumstances has upon a person - it's not a decision or choice.

Neither you nor I can somehow "decide" or "choose" to believe what Dasa used to claim about reincarnation. If either of us do one day end up believing what Dasa believed it will be because - as you yourself say - "change happens" and because - as you say - "it is possible to believe one thing and then to believe something else".

It won't happen because we make a choice or a decision.

And if it does happen, and we do come to believe it, we won't be able to somehow "decide" or "choose" not to. This is not how belief works.