27 Jun 12
Originally posted by galveston75This is interesting. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am under the impression [based on things you have said about yourself here over the last 2-3 years] that I am more widely read than you, more widely travelled and experienced than you, more intellectually curious, more analytical, more open minded, more lucid and eloquent, more aware and tolerant of diversity, more able to reach conclusions without the obstacles of ideology or dogma than you. If this is all true [and I understand and accept that you may dispute it; but if this is true...] how exactly do you define "head in the sand"?
...you have your head in the sand...
27 Jun 12
Originally posted by galveston75What did you think of the book I suggested you read?
I don't expect that from you as I know you have none. Am I wrong? Make me feel good about what MAN will do to fix this earth. Go ahead, I'll be waiting if you accept the challenge but according to all scientist you only have about 30 years or so, so you and the men you think that will cure it all, better hurry up.
27 Jun 12
Originally posted by FMFYeah that is confusing to me too.....
This is interesting. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am under the impression [based on things you have said about yourself here over the last 2-3 years] that I am more widely read than you, more widely travelled and experienced than you, more intellectually curious, more analytical, more open minded, more lucid and eloquent, more aware and tolerant of diversity, ...[text shortened]... that you may dispute it; but if this is true...] how exactly do you define "head in the sand"?
27 Jun 12
Originally posted by galveston75If Jesus had watched His speech He would not have made enemies of the Pharisees by calling them names, like hypocrites and vipers, and referring to their father as Satan the devil.
I believe in the examples Jesus gave and that we are to follow that. I could care less abut being "politically correct" but care very much in being a Christian and watching my speach to others.
27 Jun 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou seem to have missed the point.
its not a case of withholding evidence but of logic. When one is prepared to deny the divine element by limiting ones search for truth to purely material agencies then the Bible appears absurd. As soon as one makes room for the possibility, it makes sense.
You agreed with Galveston's assertion that some of us will never see the evidence until God let's us. The implication of that statement is that God is withholding something from those who don't see the evidence. We will only see what is needed to be seen when God is ready to show us. Which leads to the next question - Why is he hiding it in the first place?
Secondly, Bible = Divine = Logic?! I think you may have to go and look up what the word 'logic' means. And once again, i don't limit my search to anything but the evidence.
27 Jun 12
Originally posted by galveston75So now it's 'all scientist' (sic), and we only have 30 years.
I don't expect that from you as I know you have none. Am I wrong? Make me feel good about what MAN will do to fix this earth. Go ahead, I'll be waiting if you accept the challenge but according to all scientist you only have about 30 years or so, so you and the men you think that will cure it all, better hurry up.
27 Jun 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobNo i dont think that's the implication at all, its not that God is withholding evidence as in
You seem to have missed the point.
You agreed with Galveston's assertion that some of us will never see the evidence until God let's us. The implication of that statement is that God is withholding something from those who don't see the evidence. We will only see what is needed to be seen when God is ready to show us. Which leads to the next q ...[text shortened]... word 'logic' means. And once again, i don't limit my search to anything but the evidence.
hiding something from you, but that the evidence that is presented is not valid in your
eyes, or is flawed, or whatever. This I think was the Gmans intent, it was certainly my
intent. Anyone who has denied the divine element has limited the possibilities!
regardless of whether there is evidence or not or whether the evidence that is
presented they deem to be valid or otherwise.
27 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf the evidence is not valid for myself after making an evaluation with my own mind, what's that got to do with God? How is he involved in that process? How is God not letting me see the evidence?
No i dont think that's the implication at all, its not that God is withholding evidence as in
hiding something from you, but that the evidence that is presented is not valid in your
eyes, or is flawed, or whatever. This I think was the Gmans intent, it was certainly my
intent. Anyone who has denied the divine element has limited the possibil ...[text shortened]... evidence or not or whether the evidence that is
presented they deem to be valid or otherwise.
I don't think that was Galveston's intent, here is his original quote -
Most would not see the differances and say "nothing has changed" but God lets the ones he choses see that there is indeed a change to the worse. Ones like yourself and others here, even some so called Christians, that are not being shown by God these events, will never see it.
and this one -
Well it is. The proof is in every bible. But the point your'e missing is this. If God does not allow you to see it with understanding when you read it, that is between you and him.
It's pretty clear, to me anyhow, that the assertion from Galveston is that God is deliberately withholding evidence from certain people.
I do find it slightly baffling that the self confessed 'closed-minded, ignorant' Mr Carrobie should be calling out people for 'limiting the possibilities'. You've never yet explained how someone can be in 'search of the truth' but doing so with a 'closed mind'. But we'll debate that another day, one thing at a time.
27 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by galveston75And my claim is that something that can not be understood, does not constitute proof.
Well it is. The proof is in every bible. But the point your'e missing is this. If God does not allow you to see it with understanding when you read it, that is between you and him.
Edit: worse, you claiming something as proof but being unable to present it, is just bluffing.
I on the other hand have rock solid proof that the Bible is the work of Satan. Of course only us atheists can see the proof.
27 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobits open to interpretation as far as i can discern, if they are not being shown these
If the evidence is not valid for myself after making an evaluation with my own mind, what's that got to do with God? How is he involved in that process? How is God not letting me see the evidence?
I don't think that was Galveston's intent, here is his original quote -
[quote]Most would not see the differances and say "nothing has changed" but God o with a 'closed mind'. But we'll debate that another day, one thing at a time.
evidences by God, there must be some reason for it and its not explicitly stated on
whose part the reason for withholding has taken place, either because of the attitudes of
the recipients or because God himself has deemed them somehow not entitled to the
information, yet, the Gmans comments makes it clear that its because of the individual
rather than God that they are unable to 'grasp', the evidences, not that God has
withheld them. This is perfectly clear and has many a Biblical precedent.
Its true regardless of what i have claimed in the past due to mere expediency, if you
deny the divine, you are limiting the possibilities, ironic or otherwise.
27 Jun 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI would say that your characterization of what galveston75 said is completely at odds with what galveston75 actually said.
the Gmans comments makes it clear that its because of the individual
rather than God that they are unable to 'grasp', the evidences, not that God has
withheld them.