Blasphemy?? (THE NEW BLASPHEMY CHALLENGE MERGING THREADS)

squeakycheez07
Posts: 3
Joined: 2007-03-09
User is offlineOffline
Blasphemy?? (THE NEW BLASPHEMY CHALLENGE MERGING THREADS)

So, I just wanted to say that the Blasphemy Challenge is all wrong. ....And i'm sorry no one has told you what Mark 3:29 really means. And you can find the same thing about blasphemy in Matthew 12:32 and Luke 12:10.

Anyways, If you read the whole chapter of Mark 3, you'll see that the pharisess were attributing the power of Jesus with the power of Satan.

Jesus said what he did, not because they sined the worse sin, but becuase they were never going to ask for forgivness in the first place.

The Pharisees rejected Jesus, the only who can forgive, and they rejected the Holy Spirit, the one that would push them towards repentance. And since they repeatedly rejected and denied both Jesus and Holy Spirit....they are never going to ask forgivness to be forgiven.

I hope that makes sense.

Peace out.


rguinn
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-05-14
User is offlineOffline
random

BGH wrote:

Colby R wrote:

Either way the point is what will you believe if science debunks evolution and comed up with another theory?

Debunk?

If evolutionary theory is proven not to be supported by the facts of scientific study and another scientific theory is better supported by the evidence then I would also support that theory.

The thing is you seem to be misunderstanding  what "scientific theory" means. It does not mean there is a scattering of a few data points that support it, it means there is OVERWHELMING evidence to support it. Debunking this would mean disproving every piece of evidence in support of it. 

 

As a chemist I may have a bit of inherent bias towards biology. Regardless, I've never seen so many "maybe"'s in a scientific text as I have in the evolution portion of my biology text (Campbell, 6th edition). If anything, reading up on evolution has only driven me closer to the Lord. I don't know how any scientist could be comfortable answering every question by throwing a couple million years at it and assuming stuff just worked itself out. I imagine that any event controlled by a sentient being could be explained as to have happened by chance, given enough time.

 

zntneo wrote:
please provide me a source saying that most  historians think jesus existed? It would be great if it included people who aren't christian too. I know of  2 historians off the top of my head who are either a)jesus mythists or b) jesus agnostics aka aren't sure. So please provide some sources before making asserations. thank you

 

Mentioning two people backed up by your own secure sources (read: top of head) isn't the best idea directly after asking someone else for credible sources. 

 

 

Chances are my words will fall on deaf ears for the most part but that's okay. Christians posting at an obviously non-christian forum are fools if they expect to change anything. It is not in our power to change another person against their will.

 

The main problem here is that you (general plural) aren't curious as to whether or not God exists, you've already made up your mind and allowed emotion to overcome logic. Logic is a man-made idea and the first thing you have to understand is that if God created this world (as he did), the physical laws that govern its mechanics do not apply to God. Therefore logic cannot be used to prove or disprove his existence. So when you rebuke christianity with fact (or at least what you think is fact) you're missing the point. Similarly, you're not going to win us over because no amount of logic can convince us one way or another when it pertains to a being not constrained by the laws of this universe. 

 

Some christians come at the issue the wrong way and piss people off, driving them farther (further? I never remember which one to use) from the Lord when what they really want to do is help. Then there are stupid people who were raised wrong in the Lord and tackle non-believers with hatred and anger. They're missing the point just as badly. 

 

Just know that I love God with all my heart and all my soul, and I'm not alone. I love you guys as well, just as God does, and I will mourn your passing if it you die still in a state of confusion. As long as you live you have a chance to make things right. But don't attempt to use science and the bible in an objective capacity when your words are laced with venom, because they will soon turn subjective. Your ears are selectively deaf if you believe whatever science tells you yet you interpret the bible in a fashion that specifically suits your argument. You can't play both sides of the fence. It makes christians and scientists both look bad.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15748
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Why dont you stop trying to

Why dont you stop trying to convince yourself that there is a magical video camra in the sky recording your every move?

"Why do you believe what you believe"

EXACTLY! Try aiming that question at yourself for a change?

I know why I reject all gods and not just yours. There is no such thing as spirit sperm and dead fleash after 3 days does not survive rigor mortis. If you really believe that what does that say about your grasp of science?

You might as well believe that Apollo litterally pulled the sun across the sky with a chariot.

Maybe you should stop making excuses as to why you buy such claims and actually spend time doing some self examination.

Now dont go accusing me of hate or bigotry. This is merely a criticism of your claims, that is it. If you claimed that you could fart a Lamborginni out of your butt, I would say the same thing, "Prove it". If you couldnt, I wouldnt hate you or refuse to be your friend, I merely would not accept your claims simply because you claim it.

Your claims to me are the same as any Scientologist or Kabbaha(sp) or Jewish or Muslim appologist and hold just as much weight to me as claims of ouiji boards or tarrot cards or crop circles.

" The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams April 11th1823

"Question with boldness even the existance of God, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Thomas Jefferson, epitaph.

-- 


"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Explicit Atheism
Explicit Atheism's picture
Posts: 16
Joined: 2007-05-14
User is offlineOffline
Listen, The fact is that

Listen, The fact is that evolution is FACT, geology is FACT thus proving that your bible is wrong, not one credited scientist that has studied this has said otherwise, maybe this is because it makes so much sense that people have dedicated their liefs to it. So discrediting the time your bible takes place and proves creation isn't true, makes god not true where does that leave us? It leaves us with a huge gap, now your sue-do scientists want to change everything so it fits their needs. Something called intelligent design, you tried to bullshit us by saying some half assed thing about the first organisms on this planet how they were to advanced to be created from random protein collections and lighting. Basically your argument was over the flagella how it rotated 360 degrees for locomotion of the cell, which i do say is an idea but doesn't match up with any real scientific evidence because the organisms they are talking about aren't the ones that came first. The first organisms are called sub-microbes smaller than even bacteria harmless, but important enough to create what yous see today, we even found some on the rock from mars. So does your god work double shifts between earth and mars or is life more abundant in the universe than you want us to believe? The truth is scientists got tired of you questioning them so they set out to find single cellar organisms being created now at this time of the evolution time line, because the life process keeps on going no matter of what level of existence or animal kingdom it belongs to. Guess what, we found it, they recreated the primordial soup in sterile lab conditions simulating earths natural chemicals and processes like salt and lighting that contributed to the creation of the single celled super microbes thus proving it was a natural process not a hand of god.

Now Why bring up Alexander the great? He existed 300 years before Jesus making it alittle harder to prove he existed. Are you jellos that he was more celebrated than Jesus? Is it only because he accomplished a shit load more than most any other human here on earth or is it be because he was a friend of the Jews or better yet that he had homosexual tendencies? Next time pick someone that has accomplished less to compare to your Savior.

You probably dont know that Jesus of Nazareth wasn't the only misia of the time. In fact most other major religions had their Savior around this time to increase credibility among their followers.

"Freedom of religion, means freedom of religion"

-ME


Rave
Posts: 114
Joined: 2007-03-02
User is offlineOffline
Explicit Atheism

Explicit Atheism wrote:

Why bring up Alexander the great? He existed 300 years before Jesus making it alittle harder to prove he existed. Are you jellos that he was more celebrated than Jesus? Is it only because he accomplished a shit load more than most any other human here on earth or is it be because he was a friend of the Jews or better yet that he had homosexual tendencies? Next time pick someone that has accomplished less to compare to your Savior.

Alexander the Great undoubtedly existed and is actually an interesting character to compare Jesus to. I studied a little classical history at uni and did an essay on the deification of Alexander after his death, focussing on the use of coins of the time. Although we have no extensive written primary sources from Alexander's days, his face is on thousands of coins found all over the mediterranean and the middle east minted at the very time he was king! When he died and the Diadochi were carving out their own empires each one tried to claim the greatest right to the succession of Alexander. Over the next few generations Alexander's face was continued to be used on coins from each of the (4?) main empires the Diadochi established, trying to maintain a link to him. Over time they adding things to his picture such as ram's horns and other symbols associated with the gods, elevating him to a demi-god like status in legend.

Interesting how this happened 300 years before Jesus supposedly arrived, who performed miracles and caused major weather distubances, yet we don't have any primary sources of any sort from people who would have saw these things first hand.

"This is the real world, stupid." - Charlie Brooker

"It is necessary to be bold. Some people can be reasoned into sense, and others must be shocked into it. Say a bold thing that will stagger them, and they will begin to think." - Thomas Paine


Karma2Grace
Theist
Karma2Grace's picture
Posts: 19
Joined: 2007-07-18
User is offlineOffline
squeakycheez07 wrote: So,

squeakycheez07 wrote:

So, I just wanted to say that the Blasphemy Challenge is all wrong. ....And i'm sorry no one has told you what Mark 3:29 really means. And you can find the same thing about blasphemy in Matthew 12:32 and Luke 12:10.

Anyways, If you read the whole chapter of Mark 3, you'll see that the pharisess were attributing the power of Jesus with the power of Satan.

Jesus said what he did, not because they sined the worse sin, but becuase they were never going to ask for forgivness in the first place.

The Pharisees rejected Jesus, the only who can forgive, and they rejected the Holy Spirit, the one that would push them towards repentance. And since they repeatedly rejected and denied both Jesus and Holy Spirit....they are never going to ask forgivness to be forgiven.

I hope that makes sense.

Peace out.

 

I agree! The Blasphemy of Holy sprit is not just uttering "I am denying holy sprit" It is denying holy sprit's witness that Jesus Christ in the only begotten Son of God and Savior of the world. In other words, If somebody died with out accepting Jesus then he/she cannot be forgive. It shows the ignorance of the people come up with such idea


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Karma2Grace wrote: I agree!

Karma2Grace wrote:
I agree! The Blasphemy of Holy sprit is not just uttering "I am denying holy sprit" It is denying holy sprit's witness that Jesus Christ in the only begotten Son of God and Savior of the world. In other words, If somebody died with out accepting Jesus then he/she cannot be forgive. It shows the ignorance of the people come up with such idea

But remember we cannot judge anyone because we do not know what this person believes in their heart, even if by their words they act in some way.  Those who never know Jesus (and hearing about him isn't knowing who Jesus is; think the Jews) will be judged by God in the end.  Only God can make Jesus known to someone in their hearts so because one person does and another does not, neither can say one or the other is damned.

Accepting Jesus does not come from the will of man. 

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


Rave
Posts: 114
Joined: 2007-03-02
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak

razorphreak wrote:
Accepting Jesus does not come from the will of man.

 

I don't understand. This seems to contradict what most christians say. Whatever happened to making a 'leap of faith' and 'opening your heart' and all that nonsense? Are all these people who don't 'know' Jesus like that because God doesn't want them to know it? Is he witholding information from most people or is he only giving it to a few people he chooses? If he's choosing the people who will know Jesus, how does everyone else who is supposed to 'accept him as their lord and saviour' supposed to get to heaven?

"This is the real world, stupid." - Charlie Brooker

"It is necessary to be bold. Some people can be reasoned into sense, and others must be shocked into it. Say a bold thing that will stagger them, and they will begin to think." - Thomas Paine


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Rave wrote: I don't

Rave wrote:
I don't understand.

It's in the bible.  You going to go with what people tell you (the will of man) all the time?

Rave wrote:
Whatever happened to making a 'leap of faith' and 'opening your heart' and all that nonsense?

If by that you mean that you think people believe because of another person then I'm not sure you've either read scripture in context or for that matter, met any Christian that attributes their faith to God vs. another person.

Ephesians 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. (i.e. faith does not come from growing up in a Christian home or from going to church every Sunday)

Matthew 11:27 No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. (i.e. hearing the name of Jesus does not mean you know who Jesus is or for that matter will just automatically believe - ref. Ephesians.  God can use others to be his light to lead those who he wishes to call to service or God will just go right to the person and go from there.  Either way, belief in Jesus doesn't just happen nor does it happen through another person "saving" someone else).  Anytime you hear someone say "I saved...", they are not giving credit to God which is where salvation comes from to start with.)

Rave wrote:
Are all these people who don't 'know' Jesus like that because God doesn't want them to know it? Is he witholding information from most people or is he only giving it to a few people he chooses?

See above.

Rave wrote:
If he's choosing the people who will know Jesus, how does everyone else who is supposed to 'accept him as their lord and saviour' supposed to get to heaven?

From the bible, Romans 2:12-16.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


CrimsonEdge
CrimsonEdge's picture
Posts: 499
Joined: 2007-01-02
User is offlineOffline
Colby R wrote:

Colby R wrote:
Nice, let me ask you do you believe in the fact that Jesus was an actual person. Also do you have confidence in the historical accounts of Alexander the Great?

Yes. His teacher mentioned him (Arostotle?) who was alive during the same time that Alexander the Great was supposed to be alive.

The difference between this man and Jesus is that there is no frame of reference in regards to when the biblical texts that mention Jesus where written. This is why me writing a book about Alexander the Great doesn't support him any, while significant people who lived during his time (specifically teachers, politicians, kings, etc) have mentioned him specifically.

The difference here is that we know when these people were alive and it, again, coorelates with when Alexander the Great was said to be alive.

Now, your next question would be "But there IS evidence of Jesus being a real person! It's in the Bible" OR "But there IS evidence of Jesus being a real person! They found his grave!" Both of which aren't true (why would Jesus have a grave?). I won't go into the details of either, since the stories of the Bible where either written hundreds of years before or after Jesus was supposedly born and how the movie that said they found evidence of Jesus is false.

 

Edit:

Colby R wrote:
I will first state that I am not anti science, I enjoy hospitals and medicine,x-rays ect. I just dont want to build the foundation of my life on ever changing ground. 

Why does it matter?


Rave
Posts: 114
Joined: 2007-03-02
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: Rave

razorphreak wrote:

Rave wrote:
I don't understand.

It's in the bible. You going to go with what people tell you (the will of man) all the time?

There are talking snakes and flying zombies in the bible too - you gonna go with that all the time?

razorphreak wrote:

Rave wrote:
Whatever happened to making a 'leap of faith' and 'opening your heart' and all that nonsense?

If by that you mean that you think people believe because of another person then I'm not sure you've either read scripture in context or for that matter, met any Christian that attributes their faith to God vs. another person.

I don't mean it has anything to do with another person. People tell me / others / themselves that they have to 'open their hearts' and 'make leaps of faith' to believe, and then after that they will get all the Jesusy goodness from God, but if you don't take the step to make yourself 'prone' (I guess that's what they're getting at) then it won't be possible for you to feel the holy spirit etc.

razorphreak wrote:
Ephesians 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. (i.e. faith does not come from growing up in a Christian home or from going to church every Sunday)

So how does that jive with the regular every-day used definition of of faith as 'belief without evidence'? How is faith 'given' by God or anyone else? It sure seems like growing up in a christian home gives people an advantage in God's eyes though - he doesn't seem to be handing out too much faith in Muslim, Atheist or Hindu homes.

"This is the real world, stupid." - Charlie Brooker

"It is necessary to be bold. Some people can be reasoned into sense, and others must be shocked into it. Say a bold thing that will stagger them, and they will begin to think." - Thomas Paine


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Rave wrote: There are

Rave wrote:
There are talking snakes and flying zombies in the bible too - you gonna go with that all the time?

Atta way to use the straw man to prove...umm...what were you trying to prove?  Anyway.... 

Rave wrote:
I don't mean it has anything to do with another person. People tell me / others / themselves that they have to 'open their hearts' and 'make leaps of faith' to believe, and then after that they will get all the Jesusy goodness from God, but if you don't take the step to make yourself 'prone' (I guess that's what they're getting at) then it won't be possible for you to feel the holy spirit etc.

My impression of when people say those things is just describing a personal experience, i.e. what they feel they had to do.  Now when they turn it around at you and tell you that you must do the same that does get a bit arrogant.

Rave wrote:
So how does that jive with the regular every-day used definition of of faith as 'belief without evidence'? How is faith 'given' by God or anyone else? It sure seems like growing up in a christian home gives people an advantage in God's eyes though - he doesn't seem to be handing out too much faith in Muslim, Atheist or Hindu homes.

I'm not sure I follow.  How can you assume I believe without any evidence?  Because I have experienced God and proven it among others who have had similar experiences, does that mean I don't have evidence because you don't share it?  When someone says they've seen a ghost or a UFO, I'm not going to jump to the judgment they are crazy because they say they have.  Personal experiences I understand are no form of "proof" however without "proof" of the opposite, all you are left with are assumptions and unfortunately those tend to lead to judgments.

As far as how God gives faith to someone else, I can only answer from my own experience and go off of what others tell me how they came to know God.  It is also my experience and my understanding of God that does give me an idea as to when it's questionable.  A lot of that I'm sure isn't going to be acceptable to you but then, I don't expect you to accept it; I'm hoping you'd try to understand it.

Many people here that are identifying themselves with atheism are making the statement they were former Christians themselves or grew up in a Christian home.  Faith coming from someone else, i.e. man, does not last just as people don't last.  As far as inter-faith relationships, they are more common than you think.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


Froggy618157725
Theist
Froggy618157725's picture
Posts: 55
Joined: 2007-07-12
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: Rave

razorphreak wrote:

Rave wrote:
So how does that jive with the regular every-day used definition of of faith as 'belief without evidence'? How is faith 'given' by God or anyone else? It sure seems like growing up in a christian home gives people an advantage in God's eyes though - he doesn't seem to be handing out too much faith in Muslim, Atheist or Hindu homes.

I'm not sure I follow. How can you assume I believe without any evidence? Because I have experienced God and proven it among others who have had similar experiences, does that mean I don't have evidence because you don't share it? When someone says they've seen a ghost or a UFO, I'm not going to jump to the judgment they are crazy because they say they have. Personal experiences I understand are no form of "proof" however without "proof" of the opposite, all you are left with are assumptions and unfortunately those tend to lead to judgments.

As far as how God gives faith to someone else, I can only answer from my own experience and go off of what others tell me how they came to know God. It is also my experience and my understanding of God that does give me an idea as to when it's questionable. A lot of that I'm sure isn't going to be acceptable to you but then, I don't expect you to accept it; I'm hoping you'd try to understand it.

Many people here that are identifying themselves with atheism are making the statement they were former Christians themselves or grew up in a Christian home. Faith coming from someone else, i.e. man, does not last just as people don't last. As far as inter-faith relationships, they are more common than you think.

Indeed, on pretty much all acounts. My faith in G_d would never hold up if it was based just on stuff I read or was told. I also use the term 'faith' lightly here. I certainly wouldn't hold that belief if I didn't have something concrete to tie it to.

My dad and mom come from different religious backgrounds. My dad is Jewish, and my mom is Christian. That hasn't had much of an effect, though. If anything, it promotes open mindedness.

As far as blashpemy goes, if insults count, it isn't looking good for me Eye-wink I tend to not associate myself with entities that can't take a joke.

The sentence below is false.
The sentence above is true.
This sentence doesn't care.


Rave
Posts: 114
Joined: 2007-03-02
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: Rave

razorphreak wrote:

Rave wrote:
There are talking snakes and flying zombies in the bible too - you gonna go with that all the time?

Atta way to use the straw man to prove...umm...what were you trying to prove? Anyway....

You said that your assertion was in the bible, and asked if I would always go with popular opinion. This would suggest you are implying the bible is to be taken as a more reliable source of information about god/heaven/jesus etc than humans. I countered that with an example of the nonsense in the bible which would cause any non-biased person to reject it as a book of reliable facts. It was my intention that the comparison between your statement and mine should have caused you to see how your appeal to the reliability and/or authority of the bible to be worthless in this context.

Am I really really hard to understand or are you having problems with English? I really dislike wasting time explaining myself step by step when I shouldn't have to, but I don't want to be accused of running away from an argument.

razorphreak wrote:
Rave wrote:
So how does that jive with the regular every-day used definition of of faith as 'belief without evidence'? How is faith 'given' by God or anyone else? It sure seems like growing up in a christian home gives people an advantage in God's eyes though - he doesn't seem to be handing out too much faith in Muslim, Atheist or Hindu homes.

I'm not sure I follow. How can you assume I believe without any evidence? Because I have experienced God and proven it among others who have had similar experiences, does that mean I don't have evidence because you don't share it? When someone says they've seen a ghost or a UFO, I'm not going to jump to the judgment they are crazy because they say they have. Personal experiences I understand are no form of "proof" however without "proof" of the opposite, all you are left with are assumptions and unfortunately those tend to lead to judgments.

As far as how God gives faith to someone else, I can only answer from my own experience and go off of what others tell me how they came to know God. It is also my experience and my understanding of God that does give me an idea as to when it's questionable. A lot of that I'm sure isn't going to be acceptable to you but then, I don't expect you to accept it; I'm hoping you'd try to understand it.

Many people here that are identifying themselves with atheism are making the statement they were former Christians themselves or grew up in a Christian home. Faith coming from someone else, i.e. man, does not last just as people don't last. As far as inter-faith relationships, they are more common than you think.


1. I didn't assume you believed without evidence, I didn't address the reasons why you believe whatsoever, but your use of the word faith is going against the common definition of the term and that is disturbing the argument.

2. Again, for some reason you are thinking I said something about faith coming 'from man'. I can't find that idea anywhere in what I wrote. 'Faith' doesn't come 'from man' - that's the same as saying love comes 'from man' - it doesn't make any sense. Faith comes from accepting things which people have told you without having any evidence for it. My point was that a person born into a family that follows some belief will almost certainly absorb that same belief because the people around them do - that is incontestable, just look around you! How many Australian aboriginals or Mongolians or Kalahari bushmen do you think would start believing that there is one God, who affects them somehow through Jesus who is his son and at the same time the same person before they ever had any contact with preachers and bibles? Was God giving any of them faith back then, as you claim he does? No! People believe things like this because other people tell them it and/or similar information over and over through their formative years until it becomes entrenched in their minds. Even if they don't fully accept it, when you are vulnerable, like when you are sick and something sad has happened, and something shocking of touching happens to you - some sort of 'personal experience' - it's very easy for them to attribute it to the same thing that other people talk about and what they have been told happens. THAT is your 'being saved' - it's giving in your mental faculties so that you can swallow something there is no evidence for wholeheartedly.

You won't agree with that, you'll maintain that you were truly 'touched' or something, and it's pointless me arguing that with you so please don't try unless you have something truly compelling that hasn't been dealt with a thousand times before on this forum and on others.

P.S. Sorry for being short, I apologise for sounding rude but I've having really crappy day Yell

"This is the real world, stupid." - Charlie Brooker

"It is necessary to be bold. Some people can be reasoned into sense, and others must be shocked into it. Say a bold thing that will stagger them, and they will begin to think." - Thomas Paine


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Rave wrote:

Rave wrote:
You said that your assertion was in the bible, and asked if I would always go with popular opinion. This would suggest you are implying the bible is to be taken as a more reliable source of information about god/heaven/jesus etc than humans. I countered that with an example of the nonsense in the bible which would cause any non-biased person to reject it as a book of reliable facts. It was my intention that the comparison between your statement and mine should have caused you to see how your appeal to the reliability and/or authority of the bible to be worthless in this context.

Everyone knows and understands that the bible has metaphors that do not speak of what we know to exist on Earth from our understandings. Were there talking snakes or as you put it, "flying zombies" in Earth's history? I don't know and neither do you, but that really isn't here nor there. My point of the statement I made was in context of what we were talking about; does the understanding of Christianity, that is what was intended by God, come from the inspired word of God (i.e. from God directly) or from human interpretation? Because many Christians will use parts of the bible as justification for things that only God can do to begin with, like the saving of souls, does not make it true. Saying what you said was out of context to this point and discussion.

Rave wrote:
1. I didn't assume you believed without evidence, I didn't address the reasons why you believe whatsoever, but your use of the word faith is going against the common definition of the term and that is disturbing the argument.

OK now I think I don't understand.

Rave wrote:
2. Again, for some reason you are thinking I said something about faith coming 'from man'. I can't find that idea anywhere in what I wrote. 'Faith' doesn't come 'from man' - that's the same as saying love comes 'from man' - it doesn't make any sense. Faith comes from accepting things which people have told you without having any evidence for it.

Christianity as what comes from the inspiried word of God has one very obvious theme as to how it is that people believed and that's because they had a relationship with God. From Adam to Noah to Abraham to Moses to Jesus' disciples to the original apostles, all attribute their faith as coming from God in their writings and all acknowledge that is where the faith in God originates. It did not come from another person, ever. I'm not trying to debate the validity of the bible to do you but I do want you to understand exactly where "faith" comes from to a Christian.

Rave wrote:
My point was that a person born into a family that follows some belief will almost certainly absorb that same belief because the people around them do - that is incontestable, just look around you!..Was God giving any of them faith back then, as you claim he does? No! People believe things like this because other people tell them it and/or similar information over and over through their formative years until it becomes entrenched in their minds.

That's pretty presumptuous since neither you nor I know why a person believes as they do.

Rave wrote:
Even if they don't fully accept it, when you are vulnerable, like when you are sick and something sad has happened, and something shocking of touching happens to you - some sort of 'personal experience' - it's very easy for them to attribute it to the same thing that other people talk about and what they have been told happens. THAT is your 'being saved' - it's giving in your mental faculties so that you can swallow something there is no evidence for wholeheartedly.

My personal experience with God as well as several of my very close friends would not fall under this definition as you put it. Faith in God does not come under times of vulnerability or distress as you insinuate. It is TESTED under those times but not defined.

Rave wrote:
...you'll maintain that you were truly 'touched' or something, and it's pointless me arguing that with you so please don't try unless you have something truly compelling that hasn't been dealt with a thousand times before on this forum and on others.

Is it that your completely against accepting that someone can have that experience or is it since you yourself have never had this you cannot understand anyone else having it either, which is to say you simply don't accept because you've never seen or felt it?

Rave wrote:
P.S. Sorry for being short, I apologise for sounding rude but I've having really crappy day Yell

Aint no thing but a chicken wing.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


vexed
vexed's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-06-03
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: Is it

razorphreak wrote:

Is it that your completely against accepting that someone can have that experience or is it since you yourself have never had this you cannot understand anyone else having it either, which is to say you simply don't accept because you've never seen or felt it?

"The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects and despises, or else by some distinction sets aside and rejects; in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain inviolate.... And such is the way of all superstitions, whether in astrology, dreams, omens, divine judgements, or the like; wherein men, having a delight in such vanities, mark the events where they are fulfilled, but where they fail, although this happened much oftener, neglect and pass them by." - 1620 Francis Bacon -A philosopher of some note.

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts