12 Apr 21
@sonship saidI don't think I told you anything about the universe being endless, that's not something I believe. There are different theories on that, but nobody knows which if any actually reflect reality. Anybody who tells you man exists for a reason and the reason is X is lying to you, they don't know any more than you do. For guidance on conscience violation I recommend studying psychology. Some might say it's easy to dismiss what many see as a only a fledgeling science at best, but there's a lot of sense in there if you're prepared to put in the hours.
The Gospel speaks of a loving Perfect man dying for me and able to impart His sin overcoming victory into me supernaturally. I've TASTED this.
Where is your better guidance on overcoming temptation?
Well, there are people who could have a stab at the first one, but they couuld be wrong.
C'mon avanelanch. Your stalling or being overly humble. Is tha ...[text shortened]... _______?
Man's conscience is violated by his own behavior many times because __________?
Guide.
12 Apr 21
@sonship saidOh I could make some answers up like the guy who wrote Genesis, but there'd be as bereft as truth as any other foundation myth. As for 'sin' and 'evil', again, psychology will give you a better understanding than scripture ever can.
@avalanchethecatThese are not questions that can be honestly answered by anyone.
This sounds like a dodge.
Now WHERE are YOUR answers anywhere on this Forum.
I wish to COMPARE what you say I revere with your guidance.
Genesis tells me why God created man. At it tells a good deal of it.
If I am misguided to revere that man was made in th ...[text shortened]... ightly.
Where on the Forum can I compare to YOUR - avalanchthecat's better guidance on this issue?
12 Apr 21
@sonship saidNo that's not circular reasoning. Rationally you should reject scripture because you know that men can lie, but you don't know that god exists and can influence men. Circular reasoning would be to say that the bible is true because it says so in the bible.These are not questions that can be honestly answered by anyone.
Isn't that circular reasoning avalanchethecat?
You are offering answers by saying you know that NO ONE can answer.
How do you know that no one can answer these questions?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
12 Apr 21
1 edit
I don't think I told you anything about the universe being endless, that's not something I believe.
I recall you saying it had no beginning.
Am I suppose to be guided by you that it is without beginning YET it is coming to an END? Eternal as to the past but finite as to the future?
There are different theories on that, but nobody knows which if any actually reflect reality.
How do you KNOW that nobody knows?
Does nobody being agreed with by everyone else PROVE that nobody knows?
Suppose one person KNOWS and it is up to everyone else to either believe that person or disbelieve that person?
Anybody who tells you man exists for a reason and the reason is X is lying to you,
But the Creator of it all WOULD know.
Why should that be resented or scoffed at.
The Creator of the thing would KNOW.
The Creator could not tell us anything.
The Creator could tell us as much as He knew we could understand.
The Creator could ACT in history in a manner which demonstrates power and authority OVER nature which strongly implies He could speak authoritatively on the matter.
The Creator could speak as much as He deemed necessary for us to know in terms which vast numbers of people with varying levels of intelligence over multiple cultures and multiple ages could grasp the ESSENTIALS of.
Is there any reason why what I said could necessarily NOT be the case by any possibility?
they don't know any more than you do.
How do I know that YOU or someone else doesn't know any more than I do?
When I came out of my mother's womb, I probably knew some things.
I didn't know as much as my mother did.
Should it be resented up front on general principle that Someone may know more than me?
Should I be suspicious that anyone knowing more than me has bad intentions about me?
IS IT POSSIBLE . . . that God could know more than us and also have a heart splendidly loving and caring about us?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
12 Apr 21
For guidance on conscience violation I recommend studying psychology.
I read a statistic years ago (don't know if it is still the case) that psychologists had a higher suicide rate among all professionals.
Psychology is the study of the SOUL.
What if I am MORE than a SOUL?
The Bible says I have three parts not two.
I am not just SOUL and BODY or SOUL and MIND.
The Bible says I am "spirit and soul and body".
What about someone knowing something not only about my SOUL but also about my spirit - my function and organ for SPIRITUAL life?
Some might say it's easy to dismiss what many see as a only a fledgeling science at best, but there's a lot of sense in there if you're prepared to put in the hours.
I like science. I watch and read a lot about science.
I don't buy the propoganda that science has put God out of business.
Ie.
Man: "Sorry God. You're out of a job. We can make life."
God: "Interesting. How do you propose to make life all on your own?"
Man: "Well, first you get some dirt."
God: "Get your own dirt."
12 Apr 21
@sonship saidYou may recall somebody telling you it had no beginning, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't me. And no, you shouldn't believe me any more than any other person. You certainly shouldn't believe men who lived in a prescientific society many hundreds of years ago. The Creator, if such a thing exists, would certainly know. If it wanted you to know, it would tell you in such a way that you wouldn't have to take the words of other men who you could not verify as honest.
@avalanchethecatI don't think I told you anything about the universe being endless, that's not something I believe.
I recall you saying it had no beginning.
Am I suppose to be guided by you that it is without beginning YET it is coming to an END? Eternal as to the past but finite as to the future?
[quote]
There are different theories on that, but no ...[text shortened]... . . . that God could know more than us and also have a heart splendidly loving and caring about us?
12 Apr 21
@sonship saidYour argument is baseless. You're not comparing science to god, you're comparing science to some stories written by men who claim to have been directed or influenced by god. How is this not obvious to you?
For guidance on conscience violation I recommend studying psychology.
I read a statistic years ago (don't know if it is still the case) that psychologists had a higher suicide rate among all professionals.
Psychology is the study of the SOUL.
What if I am MORE than a SOUL?
The Bible says I have three parts not two.
I am not just SOUL and BODY or ...[text shortened]... make life all on your own?"
Man: "Well, first you get some dirt."
God: "Get your own dirt."
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
12 Apr 21
3 edits
No that's not circular reasoning. Rationally you should reject scripture because you know that men can lie, but you don't know that god exists and can influence men. Circular reasoning would be to say that the bible is true because it says so in the bible.
Random replies here.
No that's not circular reasoning. Rationally you should reject scripture because you know that men can lie,
The Scripture itself tells me plenty about lies.
It speaks about superstition, idolatry, and men deceived and/or lying.
I don't have to assume it is lying to me itself.
Examine the character of liars.
Compare with the character of Jesus Christ.
Has Jesus been revered for being a personality of great purity or of great falsehood, deception, selfish manipulation and lying?
One who lies is not as utterly selfless as Jesus was.
Hey, maybe YOU'VE been led astray by someone LYING to YOU.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
12 Apr 21
1 edit
but you don't know that god exists and can influence men. Circular reasoning
I know that God exists. If you don't accept that, I know that I am on the right track to believe that God exists.
I know that the changes in my life did not originate from me.
And I know when I read the New Testament I can say "Now THAT makes sense to my own experience. Since I asked Jesus to come to me, I HAVE had this kind of experience that the New Testament teaches about. I must be on the right track."
No skeptical guy. It is not that I found a book that says its by God therefore I know it is what it says. It demonstrates that it is authoritative on the subject.
Its central figure Christ does more than just claim authority.
He manifests authority even over the grave.
Why is suspicion of being lied to the default position of a reader of the Bible?
Why is skepticism / atheism the default position?
Is it because of poor examples in organized religion?
But its man's nature to take what is right and true as a banner under which he can forward mischief sometimes.
Do you not play chess because some people cheat at the game?
Do you throw away all your music discs because some people plagiarize for money other people's compositions or songs?
Why should I throw out the Bible because it has been sometimes used as a banner to further some selfish goals unworthy of Jesus Christ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
12 Apr 21
3 edits
You may recall somebody telling you it had no beginning, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't me. And no, you shouldn't believe me any more than any other person. You certainly shouldn't believe men who lived in a prescientific society many hundreds of years ago. The Creator, if such a thing exists, would certainly know. If it wanted you to know, it would tell you in such a way that you wouldn't have to take the words of other men who you could not verify as honest.
I think your memory is not good here.
I'll have to go find the post to settle the matter.
God has spoken. And you say if God, God would have spoken.
Hello!?
God spoke. Maybe you didn't want to listen.
Maybe you thought your agenda would be in jeopardy to live anyway you want with no regard to answering to God.
Hello!?
You say ie. "God would tell us if God was and created the world." [paraphrase]
There is no other book like the 66 books of the Bible authored over so long a time by so diverse an array of writers.
Okay, one comes close that I know of. Only one - the Bhagavad Gita. I mean in terms of a collection of writings over a long period of time.
I believe God did speak and is speaking still to us through the Genesis through Revelation and all 66 books of this library - the Holy Bible.
There is no book like it you know?
What is this folly - If there was God, God certainly would have spoken something to us?
Say WHAT ???
12 Apr 21
@sonship saidYou don't know that god exists. You believe that you know that god exists. That's not the same thing.
but you don't know that god exists and can influence men. Circular reasoning
I know that God exists. If you don't accept that, I know that I am on the right track to believe that God exists.
I know that the changes in my life did not originate from me.
And I know when I read the New Testament I can say "Now THAT makes sense to my own exper ...[text shortened]... cause it has been sometimes used as a banner to further some selfish goals unworthy of Jesus Christ?
Your scripture was written by men, and selected by men. It was presented to you by other men. Pretend all you like that it's true or truly inspired by god, it doesn't make it a fact. You have elected to dispense with the critical faculties that, if a creator exists, he granted you. You choose to believe the stories in your book are accurate representations of events that occurred, but that doesn't mean that they are, that just means that you believe that they are. There is much of value in the wisdom collected in your book, but to swallow it whole as you do is not so wise as you think.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
12 Apr 21
Okay, let's be reasonable about this pre-scientific age matter.
Are you saying that it would be more believable that God spoke IF - for example -
Jesus instead of speaking the Sermon of the Mount sat down with His disciples
and described to them in 10,000 words what made up a drop of liquid water?
Then that would be more likely to be God trying communicate to us?
Are you suspicious the "pre-scientific" Jesus didn't spend days telling the twelve disciples about quantum fluctuations and gravity waves ?
12 Apr 21
@sonship saidI think my memory is just fine thanks.
I think your memory is not good here.
I'll have to go find the post to settle the matter.
God has spoken. And you say if God, God would have spoken.
Hello!?
God spoke. Maybe you didn't want to listen.
Maybe you thought your agenda would be in jeopardy to live anyway you want with no regard to answering to God.
Hello!?
You say ie. "God would tell us if ...[text shortened]... s this folly - If there was God, God certainly would have spoken something to us?
Say WHAT ???
God hasn't spoken to you. You've read some stories that men wrote that say god spoke to them, and you feel that's good enough for you.
The bible is a collection of old stories. It's not a single volume. Those 66 books you hold so holy were written, selected and presented to you by men. Don't believe other men. They don't tell you these things for your benefit, they do so for theirs.
12 Apr 21
1 edit
@sonship saidYou say that as though you know what Jesus did. You don't. You know what these men told you that Jesus did. Can you really not understand the difference?
Okay, let's be reasonable about this pre-scientific age matter.
Are you saying that it would be more believable that God spoke IF - for example -
Jesus instead of speaking the Sermon of the Mount sat down with His disciples
and described to them in 10,000 words what made up a drop of liquid water?
Then that would be more likely to be God trying communicate to us? ...[text shortened]... Jesus didn't spend days telling the twelve disciples about quantum fluctuations and gravity waves ?
I find much to admire in the words attributed to Jesus. I also read stories of magic and miracles that seem like the sort of thing men tell other men to aggrandize themselves and make their stories seem more 'special'.
12 Apr 21
@sonship saidResist the temptation of the strawman argument, it makes you look silly.
Okay, let's be reasonable about this pre-scientific age matter.
Are you saying that it would be more believable that God spoke IF - for example -
Jesus instead of speaking the Sermon of the Mount sat down with His disciples
and described to them in 10,000 words what made up a drop of liquid water?
Then that would be more likely to be God trying communicate to us? ...[text shortened]... Jesus didn't spend days telling the twelve disciples about quantum fluctuations and gravity waves ?