A True Prophet

[bluetuesday]

You have accused me of being arrogant, and yet you make statements about the way the world is and how it is greater than I know, and on and on. You have no idea what I know, and it is quite presumptive to assume that my experience is somehow "less" than yours, or that your understanding is somehow more enlightened.

 

look at it this way. you deny much of what i experience. you therefore experience less than i do. i am subject, for most of my experience, to the same kinds of reality you experience all the time. when i say i experience things you don't, you agree with me. so please don't begin to call me mean as well as deluded. it isn't true, i am simply pointing out what you have said yourself.

 

As with most theists, you have found your Elixir of Life and it makes so much sense, and anyone who disagrees is either arrogant, narcissistic, too rigid, or what have you. In my case, I am all three. A Trinity of shortcomings, if you will.

 

i don't think your comings are short, or anything else. i have posted many times that you have free will and there is not a right and wrong way to live AS LONG AS YOU REMAIN OPEN TO NEW IDEAS. there are many ways to learn, and all have equal validity to some extent. many people disgree with the conclusions i have drawn from my experiences and i don't automatically find them arrogant, narcissistic or rigid. of course some of them are those things, or all three, but that's based on other observations than whether they argee with me. my gripe with you is that you seem closed to new ideas, NOT that you reject my ideas. please don't take it personally.

 

And you keep asserting these things and expect me or anyone else to just say, "Oh, ok. Now it all makes sense. Thanks so much." But I, and I think most people, require a little more than just your asserting something to believe it.

 

i have stated before and i will repeat it here, that i seek to convert no one. absolutely no one. there is no value in someone discovering something before they are ready for it, and so why on earth would i want to convert anyone to my way of thinking? moai, it doesn't make sense. i have posted simply to try to teach you that your way is not the only way. neither is my way, but i seem to be the only one of the two of us to understand that.

 

Your belief system provides no benefit, save the comfort it gives you. It does not alter the world for the better, nor does it really explain anything. Great that it makes you happy, but that is all it is good for. And while that is super for you, it does nothing for humanity in general.

 

i think this is the most misinformed thing i've ever heard you say. how can you possibly know the benefit or otherwise of a belief you know little about? i don't think i've ever said my beliefs give me comfort, in the way i suspect you mean it. i have however posted a few times about them actually making life harder for me personally. that doesn't mean they don't give me joy, they do, but knowing certain things means you can never go back to not knowing them.

 

you also seem to think that our beliefs are totally incompatible and don't overlap. this isn't the case at all. it is not your belief system of atheism which gave the world air conditioning and the small pox vaccine, it is scientific research of which i am a fan as much as you. i just don't think it's the be all and end all. i see its limits. scientific research didn't, by the way, facilitate the abolition of slavery, the bill of rights, the advent of democracy or free speech. these and many more came about through recognising that humans are more than an ultimately meaningless collection of cells which one day dissolve to nothing; they came about through the belief that humans have a god-given worth that is immeasurable.

 

As a theist, you are amongst the vast majority. You may assert different things about the nature of these things, but you still believe these things. I do not. Who is less affected by mass consciousness?

 

anyone who can think outside the box. i have thought outside the box of traditional religion, as have you, and i have come to my own conclusion. you have come to a conclusion shared by millions. this isn't a competition though moai, everyone is affected by the mass consciousness unless they question everything. i don't think you do question everything, because you have decided that some things are above question. that is not one of my beliefs.

 

Funny how theists are so desperate to have science validate their beliefs, even to the point of misrepresenting the concepts themselves, and what they mean. I know it is because science is so reliable, and has such predictive value that the superstitious are desperate for that kind of validation.

 

oh dear. i don't even know how to answer this, moai. words like desperate, misrepresenting and superstitious tell me everything i need to know about how much credence you will give to anything outside your current belief. can you not even consider that what religion and science are trying to explain, is the same thing? of course some religious people and some scientific people therefore see the same things and interpret them slightly differently. it doesn't mean one is desperate for validation from the other.

 

AS with most theists, over and over you contradict yourself, and hurl insults and snide remarks when you are in a weak rhetorical position. I'd blame your material, but that's just me.

 

And I know it seems insulting to have me (and every other thinking person, probably) label your beliefs as delusional. That is not my fault, or the fault of science, or reason. Change your beliefs and the term delusional will no longer apply to you.

 

change my beliefs to YOUR beliefs, and you'll think i'm reasonable. otherwise, i'm not. this is just blind faith that says 'i'm right, you're wrong' wrapped in a different label. it's impossible to reason with. but nothing you've said has insulted me. to be insulted, i would have to choose to be, and i don't.

 

i wish you luck moai, i mean that sincerely. all i have tried to do is to tell you that there is another way. you have constantly labelled me as delusional for not thinking like you, or like people who think like you. you have rejected every attempt i've made to show you that right is not necessarily the opposite of wrong - that those terms have no meaning when talking about people's experiences. but all to no avail. i'm sorry that's the case but it clearly is. i have nothing more to add.

[Moai]

look at it this way. you deny much of what i experience. you therefore experience less than i do. i am subject, for most of my experience, to the same kinds of reality you experience all the time. when i say i experience things you don't, you agree with me. so please don't begin to call me mean as well as deluded. it isn't true, i am simply pointing out what you have said yourself.

 

Am I writing in English? Is English your primary language? Maybe words are failing me, but I am not denying and cannot deny your experience. There is a big difference between EXPERIENCE and the INTERPRETATION of that experience. I have also related events to you from my own life that are similar to the events you describe. I have also described how my INTERPRETATION of these events differs from yours, and what I base my INTERPRETATION of these events on. As of yet, you haven't discussed what you base your interpretation of these events on, save how it feels or that somehow someone "knows" what that truth is.

 

And that is the crux of the whole thing. For someone to interpret these experiences as you do, one would have to accept as valid the claims that you make. You would know better than I, but I would guess that you learned these interpretations from somewhere or someone. As you accept these ideas, the experiences you have had are analyzed and interpreted within that framework. You didn't make up the idea of demons all by yourself, or of angels, or even the idea of god. How did you know that it was possible to invoke "spiritual protection" if you didn't learn about it somewhere? And how was it known that it would work unless it had been tried? How was it determined that this "spiritual protection" works, by the way? Was there testing involved, trial and error, or what? And since you assert that everything is god anyway and that there really is no good or evil, why do you need "spiritual protection"?

 

And I don't think I called you mean, I was simply pointing out that while you assume me to be arrogant, given some of your statements I might consider you the same. I do not pretend to have secret knowledge, but it seems you do. I do not pretend to have special understanding, but you do. I have not once claimed that you cannot understand what I am trying to say because you are not "in tune" with it, or words to that effect. You have.

 

Moreover, to claim that you experience a different reality than I (and most people) do strikes me as a little arrogant. I assume, and this seems true based on evidence, that I experience the same reality as everyone else. I may interpret it differently, but the reality is the same.

 

For me to be arrogant as you claim, I would have to assume that thinking as I do is a particular talent I have that others don't, and that the method I use to understand nature is uniquely mine. That is obviously not the case--in fact, very far from it. I have also mentioned many times that I would certainly change my mind if there was evidence for another position. There are rules for evidence, I didn't make them up. Personal assertion is not evidence, especially considering the extraordinary nature of your claim.

 

 

i don't think your comings are short, or anything else. i have posted many times that you have free will and there is not a right and wrong way to live AS LONG AS YOU REMAIN OPEN TO NEW IDEAS.

 

Hmmm. Let's look at that. First, you assume that your ideas are somehow new to me, which they most certainly are not. Second, if I do not accept these ideas that means I do not have free will? That doesn't even make sense. And you imply that there actually is a wrong way to live, that is not being open to new ideas.

 

In point of fact I am very open to new ideas. More than you are, I'll wager. You certainly are resistant to criticism of your pet belief. You have not provided one shred of evidence that my belief system is critically flawed, that it doesn't work, or that it is contradictory.

 

That said, there are certainly ideas that I am not open to. I am not open to the idea that the Sun revolves around the Earth. I am not open to the idea of Special Creation. I am not open to these ideas because the evidence against these ideas is so overwhelming to assert so is silly. The same can be said for the supernatural. Given that every single supernatural claim has no evidentiary support, that they contradict each other as well as often being internally inconsistent, and that the experiences themselves are open to wild speculation as to their meaning all leads me to the conclusion that there is no such thing, and that these conclusions are delusional. And I am not the only one who thinks this way. There are volumes written on the subject. However, I am willing to look at the evidence, and will change my mind immediately in the face of it. You can't be more open-minded than that. But I have yet to see any evidence.

 

From your position, there is no evidence or interpretation that could possibly be as correct as the explanation you now hold. Is that not so? If it isn't, please describe for me what would have to happen for you to abandon your belief? I can name many things that would change my mind. The Rapture happening would be one. Prayer working would be another.

 

there are many ways to learn, and all have equal validity to some extent. many people disgree with the conclusions i have drawn from my experiences and i don't automatically find them arrogant, narcissistic or rigid. of course some of them are those things, or all three, but that's based on other observations than whether they argee with me. my gripe with you is that you seem closed to new ideas, NOT that you reject my ideas. please don't take it personally.

 

I don't take it personally per se, but it is difficult to interpret being called arrogant or narcissistic as anything other than a personal attack. And even if those things were true about me, it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand in any event.

 

Are you suggesting that I accept every assertion made at face value? Why can I not ask questions about these assertions, and ask for evidence as to their validity? As I have said, present me with some evidence and I will do a 180 so quick it'll make your head spin.

 

i have stated before and i will repeat it here, that i seek to convert no one. absolutely no one. there is no value in someone discovering something before they are ready for it, and so why on earth would i want to convert anyone to my way of thinking? moai, it doesn't make sense. i have posted simply to try to teach you that your way is not the only way. neither is my way, but i seem to be the only one of the two of us to understand that.

 

I have no idea why you wouldn't want to convert someone to your way of thinking. It works so well, and is true, and makes you feel better. I should think you'd be shouting it from the rooftops.

 

I am also aware that there are other "ways" as you put it, but my way (which isn't mine at all, I just accept it) is the only one that has tangible proof to work. It is falsifiable and makes predictions. It is by far the best "way" man has yet devised to understand Nature and our place in it. When and if a better "way" comes along, I'll switch. But so far one has not been postulated.

 

There are also specific negatives that come with your "way." Knowing things by spiritual sense or from "learned elders" or a book that is the "Word of God" is dangerous. Recently, a group of young girls was videotaped in Iran dancing to Western music wearing Western clothing and without veils. This happened in a private home, and there were no men there. The tape made it onto the internet, and when the girls learned this they were terrified as to how their parents would react. All 13 committed suicide.

 

A man beat his daughter to death in Iran because he (mistakenly, it turns out) thought that he saw her on tape at a party with boys without a veil on.

 

Recently in the US, a Christian couple beat their son and then locked him in a foot locker because he was disobedient, and the boy died. They based this punishment on the Bible.

 

A couple of weeks ago, a Shiite suicide bomber killed 80 Sunnis during a religious celebration in Iraq. Notice, as an aside, that they both believe in the same book, use the same "way" of knowing, get a different answer, and it bothers them enough to kill each other about it.

 

In Serbia, Christians committed genocide against their Muslim neighbors. They are still digging up mass graves there.

 

It is often mentioned that the Inquisition, for example, happened years ago and nobody would dream of such a thing now, or that they didn't understand the "teachings" in the Bible. All of the above examples are from the last ten years. And there are many, many more.

 

You can say that your belief system would not cause you to do anything like that, and that is very probably true. But since your belief system stems from the same place, has the same evidence, and uses the same "way" of knowing as these others, how can I not be dubious of the validity of this "way of knowing? By accepting this "way" of knowing, aren't you providing these more irrational believers with a shield of sorts, since challenging someone's religious views is taboo, or rude? Or to do so is not being open to new ideas?

 

I would certainly like to convert people to my way of thinking. I was myself converted by my way of thinking. I am now more moral and happier than I was before, so just from a personal standpoint my "way" is an improvement. But my way also gives people food and medicine, protection under the law, and dignity and freedom. It may be causal it may not, but the more rational the society, the more peaceful and secure the society is. Scandinavian countries have the greatest percentage of atheists living there, and they are by far the most peaceful. Teen pregnancy is so rare that they don't even consider it a problem anymore. Sectarian violence is unheard of.

 

Look at the Southern US. The states that have the highest number of Fundamentalist believers also have the highest rates of teen pregnancy, drug abuse, spousal abuse, and divorce.

 

According to the Center For Inquiry Transnational, 20% of Americans think that the Sun Revloves around the Earth. Only 10% know what radiation is. Less than one-third can identify DNA as the key to heredity. The percentage of people who accept evolution is lower than any other developed country, except for Turkey. There are 21 countries that score higher on math and science tests. That may not matter to you, since I don't think that you are an American, but it should.

 

These people vote. They actively decide who will have his or her finger on a button that could wipe out life on this planet. Consider too that these people would see such nuclear war or the like as a sign of the return of their god-man, and would welcome such a thing. Would you rather have someone who talks to spirits and takes his advice from a book written 2,000 years ago by shepherds, or a man who examines evidence, understands the precious, unique nature of all life and demands evidence for claims? I am sure you know which I favor.

 

i think this is the most misinformed thing i've ever heard you say. how can you possibly know the benefit or otherwise of a belief you know little about? i don't think i've ever said my beliefs give me comfort, in the way i suspect you mean it. i have however posted a few times about them actually making life harder for me personally. that doesn't mean they don't give me joy, they do, but knowing certain things means you can never go back to not knowing them.

 

I can know the benefit by looking out the window. Name one discovery that came about because of your belief system. Name one disease that has been cured, name one social problem solved. Just one.

 

My belief system is not always easy, either.

 

you also seem to think that our beliefs are totally incompatible and don't overlap. this isn't the case at all. it is not your belief system of atheism which gave the world air conditioning and the small pox vaccine, it is scientific research of which i am a fan as much as you. i just don't think it's the be all and end all. i see its limits. scientific research didn't, by the way, facilitate the abolition of slavery, the bill of rights, the advent of democracy or free speech. these and many more came about through recognising that humans are more than an ultimately meaningless collection of cells which one day dissolve to nothing; they came about through the belief that humans have a god-given worth that is immeasurable.

 

Nope. Science is a part of the greater way of thinking known as rationalism. So is atheism. That is not to say that you cannot be irrational about god and rational about everything else, you certainly can. Slavery was abolished because of rationalism, not spiritual revelation. My country experienced the most destructive war in its history because of it. If spiritual revelation was the reason for rejecting it, no shots would have been fired, would they? The Bill Of Rights is a secular document. The Amendments come from rationalism. The advent of democracy also derives from rationalism, as it goes directly against the Divine Right of Kings--among other pernicious nonsense. Free speech and free thought are also rationalist, secular ideas, and because rationalists like myself value them so highly we are loathe to give such things up. God-belief had nothing to do with this. Some Founders of the US were deists, some Baptists, some Methodists. But they held the freedom of the mind and the free exchange of ideas in higher regard than they did their particular faiths, and sought a means to secure the freedom of the mind from all restriction.

 

All of these things have nothing to do with any ideas about what happens to you after you die, by the way. They directly have to do with the idea that man can determine right from wrong on his own, without the need for supernatural guidance. Hence these things being "self-evident."

 

I am sure that we are not far apart on most things, and probably agree on more than we don't, save this. It is important that these ideas and all ideas are held up to vigorous debate and scrutiny, as that is the only way we can improve our lot.

 

anyone who can think outside the box. i have thought outside the box of traditional religion, as have you, and i have come to my own conclusion. you have come to a conclusion shared by millions. this isn't a competition though moai, everyone is affected by the mass consciousness unless they question everything. i don't think you do question everything, because you have decided that some things are above question. that is not one of my beliefs.

 

I did question everything, but stopped asking some questions when I got the answers. As did you. The question here is more one of method, and conclusion. And while there are millions of rationalists out there (and hopefully more every day), we are still by far the minority in the world.

 

oh dear. i don't even know how to answer this, moai. words like desperate, misrepresenting and superstitious tell me everything i need to know about how much credence you will give to anything outside your current belief. can you not even consider that what religion and science are trying to explain, is the same thing? of course some religious people and some scientific people therefore see the same things and interpret them slightly differently. it doesn't mean one is desperate for validation from the other.

 

They do seek to explain many of the same things, true. But they are not equally valid ways of knowing.

 

How did the Universe begin? God did it. Where does God come from? He was always here? How do you know? The book says so. Who created God? Nobody, He has always been here. How do you know? the book says so. Why are there so many beetle species? God did it. That kind of knowing and answering of questions kills all inquiry.

 

Why is it that anti-Intellectual Bible believers insist on calling themselves "Creation Scientists"? That is oxymoronic, by the way. Why do so many people seek scientific validation of their superstitions? Why is there even a notion of "True" science versus its opposite? Its because that even these believers understand that science works, and as much as people rail against it and misunderstand it, they need it. So they try to co-opt it, and somehow squeeze their superstitions it its framework, in the hopes of giving these beliefs some validity. Look at the Institute For Creation Research, Answers in Genesis and the like and you will see what I mean. As I mentioned, look at the website that say things like "Use Quantum Mechanics to find Spiritual Wellbeing" and the like. Look at the books written (The Dancing Wu-Li Masters is one) that assert the idea that Quantum Mechanics validates Hindu mysticism--much to the chagrin of the men actually working in the field.

 

change my beliefs to YOUR beliefs, and you'll think i'm reasonable. otherwise, i'm not. this is just blind faith that says 'i'm right, you're wrong' wrapped in a different label.

 

No, it isn't. I have no blind faith. My system works. It is self-evident that it works. The very means you are using to communicate with me is proof that it works. And by and large, you already think as I do. I am just suggesting that you apply that a little further and apply it to your god-belief, that's all.

 

I didn't not say that you aren't reasonable, as you clearly are. I think that you have come to conclusions that are unreasonable is some respects. I have provided argument and evidence to that effect. If you choose to ignore it, that is certainly your right.

 

it's impossible to reason with.

 

Tell me about it. But since you brought it up, what is it about my position that is unreasonable? In what do I have blind faith? Please point out one area of my position that requires faith as you mean it, let alone the blind variety? I have considered all that you have said, and repeatedly asked for evidence. You have not provided any (as there is none), save your assertions that you "know" these things to be true.

 

Love Hurts "knows" that her beliefs are true, yet she does not believe in a way anywhere close to the way you do. Again I will ask, how do you know she is wrong and you are right? How do you know that Muslims are wrong? Why is it that in the many exchanges we have had, you have never once even attempted an answer to that?

 

You arrive at your beliefs in the same manner, for the same reasons. I arrive at mine by looking at evidence and letting the chips fall where they may.

 

but nothing you've said has insulted me. to be insulted, i would have to choose to be, and i don't.

 

That's good, because it is not my intention to insult you.

 

i wish you luck moai, i mean that sincerely. all i have tried to do is to tell you that there is another way. you have constantly labelled me as delusional for not thinking like you, or like people who think like you. you have rejected every attempt i've made to show you that right is not necessarily the opposite of wrong - that those terms have no meaning when talking about people's experiences. but all to no avail. i'm sorry that's the case but it clearly is. i have nothing more to add.

 

Again, as far as experiences go you are 100% correct, interpretations, no. And as I mentioned earlier, you do think like I do, you just don't take it as far as I do. Why not? Why do you insulate your god-belief so?

 

It is not the disagreement with me that makes you delusional, it is the acceptance of these ideas with no evidence save your interpretation of your experience. I am sure you have seen optical illusions before. There are audio illusions, too. I enjoy them immensely, but beyond their entertainment value they demonstrate that our senses can be easily tricked, and that they are in fact a very poor way of knowing and learning about the world. Hence experimentation and repeatable experience being so important to science.

 

There is an interesting experiment I am reminded of. You can do this at home. Take a glass and fill it with lukewarm water. Run a plastic tube around the outside of the glass. In the tube, run icewater through it. Pick up the glass. It will feel boiling hot, even though there is no heat involved. If you continue to hold you hand there, you will get blisters, and longer than that severe burns. All of this with no heat at all. How can this be? Your mind is so convinced by the senses in your hand that it tells the body it is burning even when it isn't, and the body reacts as if it is burning when in reality there is nothing harmful happening.

 

Given that our bodies and minds can be so easily tricked, why would I trust my conclusions and feelings just because they are mine? If you grab the glass, you would swear it is boiling hot, but put a thermometer up to it and you can see that it is not. Which to trust, the thermometer or your own hand?---It is rational to trust both, in a way, as even though I know that it is cold it will still hurt me when I pick it up. The point is that our best hope of gaining true understanding about the world is to remove our own foibles and shortcomings and look at evidence.

 

I would again ask that you provide an alternate way of looking at things that does as well, and I will change my outlook immediately.

[lonelybird]

Am I writing in English? Is English your primary language? Maybe words are failing me, but I am not denying and cannot deny your experience. There is a big difference between EXPERIENCE and the INTERPRETATION of that experience. I have also related events to you from my own life that are similar to the events you describe. I have also described how my INTERPRETATION of these events differs from yours, and what I base my INTERPRETATION of these events on. As of yet, you haven't discussed what you base your interpretation of these events on, save how it feels or that somehow someone "knows" what that truth is.

 

And that is the crux of the whole thing. For someone to interpret these experiences as you do, one would have to accept as valid the claims that you make. You would know better than I, but I would guess that you learned these interpretations from somewhere or someone. As you accept these ideas, the experiences you have had are analyzed and interpreted within that framework. You didn't make up the idea of demons all by yourself, or of angels, or even the idea of god. How did you know that it was possible to invoke "spiritual protection" if you didn't learn about it somewhere? And how was it known that it would work unless it had been tried? How was it determined that this "spiritual protection" works, by the way? Was there testing involved, trial and error, or what? And since you assert that everything is god anyway and that there really is no good or evil, why do you need "spiritual protection"?

 

And I don't think I called you mean, I was simply pointing out that while you assume me to be arrogant, given some of your statements I might consider you the same. I do not pretend to have secret knowledge, but it seems you do. I do not pretend to have special understanding, but you do. I have not once claimed that you cannot understand what I am trying to say because you are not "in tune" with it, or words to that effect. You have.

 

Moreover, to claim that you experience a different reality than I (and most people) do strikes me as a little arrogant. I assume, and this seems true based on evidence, that I experience the same reality as everyone else. I may interpret it differently, but the reality is the same.

 

For me to be arrogant as you claim, I would have to assume that thinking as I do is a particular talent I have that others don't, and that the method I use to understand nature is uniquely mine. That is obviously not the case--in fact, very far from it. I have also mentioned many times that I would certainly change my mind if there was evidence for another position. There are rules for evidence, I didn't make them up. Personal assertion is not evidence, especially considering the extraordinary nature of your claim.

 

 

 

 

Hmmm. Let's look at that. First, you assume that your ideas are somehow new to me, which they most certainly are not. Second, if I do not accept these ideas that means I do not have free will? That doesn't even make sense. And you imply that there actually is a wrong way to live, that is not being open to new ideas.

 

In point of fact I am very open to new ideas. More than you are, I'll wager. You certainly are resistant to criticism of your pet belief. You have not provided one shred of evidence that my belief system is critically flawed, that it doesn't work, or that it is contradictory.

 

That said, there are certainly ideas that I am not open to. I am not open to the idea that the Sun revolves around the Earth. I am not open to the idea of Special Creation. I am not open to these ideas because the evidence against these ideas is so overwhelming to assert so is silly. The same can be said for the supernatural. Given that every single supernatural claim has no evidentiary support, that they contradict each other as well as often being internally inconsistent, and that the experiences themselves are open to wild speculation as to their meaning all leads me to the conclusion that there is no such thing, and that these conclusions are delusional. And I am not the only one who thinks this way. There are volumes written on the subject. However, I am willing to look at the evidence, and will change my mind immediately in the face of it. You can't be more open-minded than that. But I have yet to see any evidence.

 

From your position, there is no evidence or interpretation that could possibly be as correct as the explanation you now hold. Is that not so? If it isn't, please describe for me what would have to happen for you to abandon your belief? I can name many things that would change my mind. The Rapture happening would be one. Prayer working would be another.

 

 

 

I don't take it personally per se, but it is difficult to interpret being called arrogant or narcissistic as anything other than a personal attack. And even if those things were true about me, it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand in any event.

 

Are you suggesting that I accept every assertion made at face value? Why can I not ask questions about these assertions, and ask for evidence as to their validity? As I have said, present me with some evidence and I will do a 180 so quick it'll make your head spin.

 

 

 

I have no idea why you wouldn't want to convert someone to your way of thinking. It works so well, and is true, and makes you feel better. I should think you'd be shouting it from the rooftops.

 

I am also aware that there are other "ways" as you put it, but my way (which isn't mine at all, I just accept it) is the only one that has tangible proof to work. It is falsifiable and makes predictions. It is by far the best "way" man has yet devised to understand Nature and our place in it. When and if a better "way" comes along, I'll switch. But so far one has not been postulated.

 

There are also specific negatives that come with your "way." Knowing things by spiritual sense or from "learned elders" or a book that is the "Word of God" is dangerous. Recently, a group of young girls was videotaped in Iran dancing to Western music wearing Western clothing and without veils. This happened in a private home, and there were no men there. The tape made it onto the internet, and when the girls learned this they were terrified as to how their parents would react. All 13 committed suicide.

 

A man beat his daughter to death in Iran because he (mistakenly, it turns out) thought that he saw her on tape at a party with boys without a veil on.

 

Recently in the US, a Christian couple beat their son and then locked him in a foot locker because he was disobedient, and the boy died. They based this punishment on the Bible.

 

A couple of weeks ago, a Shiite suicide bomber killed 80 Sunnis during a religious celebration in Iraq. Notice, as an aside, that they both believe in the same book, use the same "way" of knowing, get a different answer, and it bothers them enough to kill each other about it.

 

In Serbia, Christians committed genocide against their Muslim neighbors. They are still digging up mass graves there.

 

It is often mentioned that the Inquisition, for example, happened years ago and nobody would dream of such a thing now, or that they didn't understand the "teachings" in the Bible. All of the above examples are from the last ten years. And there are many, many more.

 

You can say that your belief system would not cause you to do anything like that, and that is very probably true. But since your belief system stems from the same place, has the same evidence, and uses the same "way" of knowing as these others, how can I not be dubious of the validity of this "way of knowing? By accepting this "way" of knowing, aren't you providing these more irrational believers with a shield of sorts, since challenging someone's religious views is taboo, or rude? Or to do so is not being open to new ideas?

 

I would certainly like to convert people to my way of thinking. I was myself converted by my way of thinking. I am now more moral and happier than I was before, so just from a personal standpoint my "way" is an improvement. But my way also gives people food and medicine, protection under the law, and dignity and freedom. It may be causal it may not, but the more rational the society, the more peaceful and secure the society is. Scandinavian countries have the greatest percentage of atheists living there, and they are by far the most peaceful. Teen pregnancy is so rare that they don't even consider it a problem anymore. Sectarian violence is unheard of.

 

Look at the Southern US. The states that have the highest number of Fundamentalist believers also have the highest rates of teen pregnancy, drug abuse, spousal abuse, and divorce.

 

According to the Center For Inquiry Transnational, 20% of Americans think that the Sun Revloves around the Earth. Only 10% know what radiation is. Less than one-third can identify DNA as the key to heredity. The percentage of people who accept evolution is lower than any other developed country, except for Turkey. There are 21 countries that score higher on math and science tests. That may not matter to you, since I don't think that you are an American, but it should.

 

These people vote. They actively decide who will have his or her finger on a button that could wipe out life on this planet. Consider too that these people would see such nuclear war or the like as a sign of the return of their god-man, and would welcome such a thing. Would you rather have someone who talks to spirits and takes his advice from a book written 2,000 years ago by shepherds, or a man who examines evidence, understands the precious, unique nature of all life and demands evidence for claims? I am sure you know which I favor.

 

 

 

I can know the benefit by looking out the window. Name one discovery that came about because of your belief system. Name one disease that has been cured, name one social problem solved. Just one.

 

My belief system is not always easy, either.

 

 

 

Nope. Science is a part of the greater way of thinking known as rationalism. So is atheism. That is not to say that you cannot be irrational about god and rational about everything else, you certainly can. Slavery was abolished because of rationalism, not spiritual revelation. My country experienced the most destructive war in its history because of it. If spiritual revelation was the reason for rejecting it, no shots would have been fired, would they? The Bill Of Rights is a secular document. The Amendments come from rationalism. The advent of democracy also derives from rationalism, as it goes directly against the Divine Right of Kings--among other pernicious nonsense. Free speech and free thought are also rationalist, secular ideas, and because rationalists like myself value them so highly we are loathe to give such things up. God-belief had nothing to do with this. Some Founders of the US were deists, some Baptists, some Methodists. But they held the freedom of the mind and the free exchange of ideas in higher regard than they did their particular faiths, and sought a means to secure the freedom of the mind from all restriction.

 

All of these things have nothing to do with any ideas about what happens to you after you die, by the way. They directly have to do with the idea that man can determine right from wrong on his own, without the need for supernatural guidance. Hence these things being "self-evident."

 

I am sure that we are not far apart on most things, and probably agree on more than we don't, save this. It is important that these ideas and all ideas are held up to vigorous debate and scrutiny, as that is the only way we can improve our lot.

 

 

 

I did question everything, but stopped asking some questions when I got the answers. As did you. The question here is more one of method, and conclusion. And while there are millions of rationalists out there (and hopefully more every day), we are still by far the minority in the world.

 

 

 

They do seek to explain many of the same things, true. But they are not equally valid ways of knowing.

 

How did the Universe begin? God did it. Where does God come from? He was always here? How do you know? The book says so. Who created God? Nobody, He has always been here. How do you know? the book says so. Why are there so many beetle species? God did it. That kind of knowing and answering of questions kills all inquiry.

 

Why is it that anti-Intellectual Bible believers insist on calling themselves "Creation Scientists"? That is oxymoronic, by the way. Why do so many people seek scientific validation of their superstitions? Why is there even a notion of "True" science versus its opposite? Its because that even these believers understand that science works, and as much as people rail against it and misunderstand it, they need it. So they try to co-opt it, and somehow squeeze their superstitions it its framework, in the hopes of giving these beliefs some validity. Look at the Institute For Creation Research, Answers in Genesis and the like and you will see what I mean. As I mentioned, look at the website that say things like "Use Quantum Mechanics to find Spiritual Wellbeing" and the like. Look at the books written (The Dancing Wu-Li Masters is one) that assert the idea that Quantum Mechanics validates Hindu mysticism--much to the chagrin of the men actually working in the field.

 

 

 

No, it isn't. I have no blind faith. My system works. It is self-evident that it works. The very means you are using to communicate with me is proof that it works. And by and large, you already think as I do. I am just suggesting that you apply that a little further and apply it to your god-belief, that's all.

 

I didn't not say that you aren't reasonable, as you clearly are. I think that you have come to conclusions that are unreasonable is some respects. I have provided argument and evidence to that effect. If you choose to ignore it, that is certainly your right.

 

 

 

Tell me about it. But since you brought it up, what is it about my position that is unreasonable? In what do I have blind faith? Please point out one area of my position that requires faith as you mean it, let alone the blind variety? I have considered all that you have said, and repeatedly asked for evidence. You have not provided any (as there is none), save your assertions that you "know" these things to be true.

 

Love Hurts "knows" that her beliefs are true, yet she does not believe in a way anywhere close to the way you do. Again I will ask, how do you know she is wrong and you are right? How do you know that Muslims are wrong? Why is it that in the many exchanges we have had, you have never once even attempted an answer to that?

 

You arrive at your beliefs in the same manner, for the same reasons. I arrive at mine by looking at evidence and letting the chips fall where they may.

 

 

 

That's good, because it is not my intention to insult you.

 

 

 

Again, as far as experiences go you are 100% correct, interpretations, no. And as I mentioned earlier, you do think like I do, you just don't take it as far as I do. Why not? Why do you insulate your god-belief so?

 

It is not the disagreement with me that makes you delusional, it is the acceptance of these ideas with no evidence save your interpretation of your experience. I am sure you have seen optical illusions before. There are audio illusions, too. I enjoy them immensely, but beyond their entertainment value they demonstrate that our senses can be easily tricked, and that they are in fact a very poor way of knowing and learning about the world. Hence experimentation and repeatable experience being so important to science.

 

There is an interesting experiment I am reminded of. You can do this at home. Take a glass and fill it with lukewarm water. Run a plastic tube around the outside of the glass. In the tube, run icewater through it. Pick up the glass. It will feel boiling hot, even though there is no heat involved. If you continue to hold you hand there, you will get blisters, and longer than that severe burns. All of this with no heat at all. How can this be? Your mind is so convinced by the senses in your hand that it tells the body it is burning even when it isn't, and the body reacts as if it is burning when in reality there is nothing harmful happening.

 

Given that our bodies and minds can be so easily tricked, why would I trust my conclusions and feelings just because they are mine? If you grab the glass, you would swear it is boiling hot, but put a thermometer up to it and you can see that it is not. Which to trust, the thermometer or your own hand?---It is rational to trust both, in a way, as even though I know that it is cold it will still hurt me when I pick it up. The point is that our best hope of gaining true understanding about the world is to remove our own foibles and shortcomings and look at evidence.

 

I would again ask that you provide an alternate way of looking at things that does as well, and I will change my outlook immediately.

Moai, those bad things you mentioned are rooted in Human nature. A pure rational world won't bring the perfection you wish, it will lead to terrible result because the problems ROOT in human nature. and that kind of perfection will never happen as long as human being exist. Think about Hilter, didn't he want to form a perfect world without "imperfect human being" in it?

 

People like to worship idols. Science is an idol (you worship this one), a powerful people who is worshiped by other human being is an idol. People make up own images of gods (sometimes they think god is evil and have evil plan for them) to worship is a form of idol. People pleaser is making up idols all the time (worship people around them). So God says "don't worship others gods, but only ME". worship other gods human being made up by themselves are not only sinnful, but very harmful to self.

 

How can explain LOVE by rational reasoning? If there are other realms (spiritual, soul) besides rational reasoning realm (mind), why do you try to explain every thing only in rational reasoning realm?

 

I hope you see that you put all A person's faults on B person's responsility. Don't make sense at all, even in rational realm.

[Moai]

Moai, those bad things you mentioned are rooted in Human nature. A pure rational world won't bring the perfection you wish, it will lead to terrible result because the problems ROOT in human nature. and that kind of perfection will never happen as long as human being exist. Think about Hilter, didn't he want to form a perfect world without "imperfect human being" in it?

 

People would still do bad things, but one of the best reasons for doing bad things would be removed. That said, Muslims are not blowing themselves up because of human nature, girls aren't killing themselves over moral transgressions, or being beaten to death because of human nature. Religion is making them do that. It actually goes against human nature to blow yourself up.

 

Explain how and why the most secular cultures are the most peaceful and safe.

 

Yes, Hitler was into eugenics. Would say that Hitler was rational? He was Catholic, by the way, and that's where he got a lot of his anti-Semitism from.

 

People like to worship idols. Science is an idol (you worship this one), a powerful people who is worshiped by other human being is an idol. People make up own images of gods (sometimes they think god is evil and have evil plan for them) to worship is a form of idol.

 

Science is not an idol and I do not worship it. Science is a system of processes that we use to understand the natural world. And it works. I don't meet once a week and give homage and praise to science, I don't tithe to science, and there is no dogma in science.

 

You have made up your own image of god, too. You don't think so because you think the Bible is the word of god, but that is what you are doing. A Muslim would look at you wand easily spot that, just as you would him.

 

People pleaser is making up idols all the time (worship people around them). So God says "don't worship others gods, but only ME". worship other gods human being made up by themselves are not only sinnful, but very harmful to self.

 

Really? 5 billion people would disagree with you. If this is true, how can a billion Hindus live their lives as happily as anyone else, or Buddhists, or any of the other 5,000 religions on the planet? Are you saying that all these people can't really be happy?

 

How can explain LOVE by rational reasoning? If there are other realms (spiritual, soul) besides rational reasoning realm (mind), why do you try to explain every thing only in rational reasoning realm?

 

Easily. I have done so before. I do not think that there are other realms per se, but there is a sense of wonder that comes along with being human. Man does search for meaning, and that meaning is determined by the individual. You do not need a supernatural being to experience it, find it, or enjoy it.

 

I hope you see that you put all A person's faults on B person's responsility. Don't make sense at all, even in rational realm.

 

I don't understand what this is supposed to mean, sorry. COuld you rephrase that?

[lonelybird]

I don't understand what this is supposed to mean, sorry. COuld you rephrase that?

Nope, your loss

[burning 4 revenge]

Nope, your loss

sometimes i want to go EAST and kiss you on the forehead

[lonelybird]

sometimes i want to go EAST and kiss you on the forehead

Do you really mean that? many girls would hate me for this, even it is on forehead........

[lonelybird]

Explain how and why the most secular cultures are the most peaceful and safe.

Yeah, North Korea is pure secular culture

[Moai]

Yeah, North Korea is pure secular culture

 

First off, not my loss. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. It is nice that your Saviour gives you the feeling of being disrespectful. Super! Over and over, you and other believers show the bankruptcy of your position by being snide.

 

It is no secret that I have less than no respect for your religious beliefs, but I have been as respectful as I possibly can to you, and other theists, as people. And then you respond with "Nope! Your loss!" when YOU are the one who could not make your point known. Oh, wait, but then, you are calling me stupid there, as I didn't get it so it's my problem! That is so awesome. Ah, the love of Jesus. Jesus must love hypocrites, as all his believers seem to be them.

 

Look, you are the one with the nutty beliefs, not me. Say what you want about not loving the lord being bad for you; the fact is, all other religions say that about yours. You don't care, because you can just tune them out, disrespect them, invalidate their beliefs and culture, just because you have faith and that makes you chosen. Awesome for you. Relax, and feel warm and safe as one of god's elect, and knowing that you can treat those who aren't as you see fit. It's no secret that the Bible says do exactly that. Nice religion you have there. Your god is a pretty cool guy, too.

 

I do not accept your god. I can demonstrate very specifically why your god is imaginary. Yet I still endeavor to treat you with respect and dignity, even though I think that your belief system is so patently evil and misguided (and I have evidence), because you are another person and are therefore worthy of respect, just for that. I may not respect your belief and challenge it, but I still respect you (or rather respected, past tense).

 

As usual, the theist's true colors come shining through.

 

I have mentioned it before, and I will do so again. This is what this person, who says, "No, it's your loss" believes:

 

Magic trees.

 

A flat earth.

 

And earth that is only 6,000 years old.

 

Demons are real, and leave evidence on Earth to lead people astray. Satan's only purpose is to lead us astray and trick us, and uses science to do so.

 

People rise from the dead. And not just Jesus, but all the people who descended on Jerusalem in Matthew. Haven't seen you address that, ironically.

 

At some point, Jesus will show up and *poof* you to Heaven.

 

And on and on. It's great that you think all this is true, and you think this will save you, but in point of fact all it means is you are wasting the one life you have on a fairy tale every bit as rational as leprechauns and ogres.

 

I try to be respectful about your superstitions as much as I can be, but after so many insults what should be my response, especially considering the fact that you are the one who believes all this magical nonsense?

 

North Korea is not remotely a rational society, nor did I suggest that it was. If you think that their society is rational, that is your business, but by any standard I don't think it is--nor does anyone else, hence there being an alarm about them getting a nuclear weapon. You are quick to assert that I am blaming god when people do things in his name and its not his fault, but think it is fine when an irrational society also has atheism as an antecedent (always replaced by a deified dictator, so the atheism argument is specious) you can use that to invalidate my position.

 

You go to the doctor when you are sick, enjoy the foods in the grocery store, type on a computer, drive a car or at least ride the bus...everything that makes your life tangibly better is because I, and others smarter and more diligent than I work hard to understand the world and make things easier for everyone. And, unlike you, we don't test people to see what they believe before they get a vaccine, or can buy food. The benefits of our system are available to all, regardless of belief, political system, race, or creed.

 

You're welcome. I just wish that you would at least respect these benefits enough to have common courtesy. But, given the way you believers have behaved since the dawn of time, it's a tall order. Forgive for expecting you to at least be civil and give others the benefit of the doubt. It is my mistake; asking you to be civil and respectful would be like asking a small child to do calculus. It is beyond them, and respect is beyond you. We both know you get it from your book, so more power to you! Enjoy the End Times Buffet...soup is on your left...

 

After your recent comment, I have no idea why you post on these threads. Well, that's not true. You obviously don't want to exchange ideas and maintain a dialog, you just want to quote scripture, make assertions and have them accepted at face value, and enjoy the feeling you get from "spreading the good news." Groovy for you. Are you having fun? I hope so. Does posting here make you feel like you are doing the Lord's work? I'll bet it does. Oh, you little good believer you! Way to get the message out there--a message that everyone in the world has heard a million times over.

 

Do you really think that when you post your nonsense here that nobody has heard it before, or doesn't know the premise of your religion? Puhleeze. They do, and they still reject it. Or they take parts and leave others. It is all a big ball of hypocrisy and lies. But god loves you! It's true! Don't worry, in a few years you'll be able to burn and torture unbelievers again. Just be patient.

 

I know that there are many people who may have not read or thought of the questions or answers that I post--and they aren't even really mine, they have been around LONGER THAN YOUR RELIGION HAS.

 

But, that's cool, don't give me the respect I deserve as another human being who has never intentionally wronged you in any way. Dismiss me. That shows more about your belief system than pages and pages of evidence or arguments I could post. So thanks!

 

Funny how I am the atheist, and I took "love thy neighbor as thyself" to heart, and the believer largely ignores it. Enjoy Heaven. You and all the other hypocrites will have loads to talk about.

 

In case anyone is wondering, yeah, that really made me mad.

[riobikini]

re:

 

Moai: " Leprechauns can take many forms, too. Sometimes they turn into squirrels and run off into he forest, or turn into a bush. There are many accounts of this happening."

 

Entertaining.

 

But give some actual accounts, anyway.

 

On the other hand -it's good to see you trying to lighten up.

 

-Rio

[lonelybird]

......

Yes, many people heard about this message, but there are so many understandings out there. people make up own gods but think that they believe in God

Not that I cannot converse with you, but you bring up same point again and again, you determined you won't change, so I give up answering, not that I disrespect you.

[Island Girl]

Not that I cannot converse with you, but you bring up same point again and again, you determined you won't change, so I give up answering, not that I disrespect you.

 

To be fair you have never answered any questions directly.

 

You have posted comments that go in circles and quoted scripture - but no answers.

[lonelybird]

To be fair you have never answered any questions directly.

 

You have posted comments that go in circles and quoted scripture - but no answers.

I answered lots of stuff, but you can take it or not are not my responsibility.

and what my answer to complaining negative stuff? complain back? and throw dirty ball back?

[Island Girl]

I answered lots of stuff, but you can take it or not are not my responsibility.

and what my answer to complaining negative stuff? complain back? and throw dirty ball back?

 

What?

[pureinheart]

Not that I cannot converse with you, but you bring up same point again and again, you determined you won't change, so I give up answering, not that I disrespect you.

 

 

Having been in many "debates" (so to speak) in my day, either panels of people or one on one....both sides giving reasons/evidence for their stance/belief. At some point one must use wisdom concerning when to quit, as it can lead to anger, hurt feelings, ect...

 

In some cases the sole purpose for debating is changing the other sides veiws, very rarely does this happen in this day and hour, and most are not gifted for this.

 

Lonelybird, you know when to quit, most don't....

 

Island Girl and Moai....believers do use much scripture to answer, make a point ect...the bible to us are the answers, the truth....

 

For me, have no anointing whatsoever concerning any types of confrontations, it's taken years to balance the people pleasing thing, also to not let things build up then blow up.

 

This may sound bad, although it is not mean't to, and if I have a wrong heart, I pray God changes it....I care, and am happy when others get saved, although know I can't change anyone, and lack Gods power in this area....also can't say I respect belief systems that I know are wrong, and don't desire to change the persons thinking at all.

 

Am of the opinion that those who become deeply indoctrinated in wrong beliefs are extremely unbalanced and very hard to deal with....I would rather keep the peace and keep it light.....this goes for wrong thinking in believers also.

 

All I can say, and my only defence is that I love the Lord God with all of my mind, heart and soul and the same with Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit....if the world wants that too, fine if not I am totally confident the His Word never returns void.

[Moai]

Having been in many "debates" (so to speak) in my day, either panels of people or one on one....both sides giving reasons/evidence for their stance/belief. At some point one must use wisdom concerning when to quit, as it can lead to anger, hurt feelings, ect...

 

Thank you for a thoughtful post.

 

In some cases the sole purpose for debating is changing the other sides veiws, very rarely does this happen in this day and hour, and most are not gifted for this.

 

It is not just for the people involved in the discussion, it is for any who may be reading and still undecided. That said, I was swayed by argument and evidence to reach my current position. I have the capacity for reason, and I think that everyone else does, too.

 

Lonelybird, you know when to quit, most don't....

 

Island Girl and Moai....believers do use much scripture to answer, make a point ect...the bible to us are the answers, the truth....

 

I understand that. But there are questions raised that are not answered by the Bible, and yet scripture is still quoted in those instances.

 

If my question was something like, "How do I get to Heaven?" I would expect scripture to be used. But when I ask something like, "How do you explain ammonite sorting--which cannot be the way it is if there was a global flood--I get random scripture or I am advised to pray and it will make sense.

 

Beyond that, the Bible specifically and believers in general make claims for which there should be evidence.

 

On these forums, I have read, "If more people believed in god, there wouldn't be divorce!" Evidence shows otherwise. I post relevant evidence that shows this claim to be specious, and the silence is deafening. The conversation shifts and the scripture torrent begins.

 

I have read, "Belief in god makes you a better person." I post evidence that shows this to be false, and again, silence.

 

On the very subject of this thread, I have not received an answer to several questions--let alone a satisfactory one.

 

Benny Hinn lies to people. He claims to work with the Holy Spirit to heal people. Believers flock to his crusades, give him millions, and yet it is obvious to any thinking person that he is a liar. It has been suggested that listening to the Holy Spirit will provide you with the necessary information to tell who is a prophet of god and who isn't. But the unfortunate, desperate people who attend his services are ardent believers, and think that they have the Holy Spirit helping them. How can this be? If a person is seeking god with all his heart, the Bible says that the Holy Spirit will move into their heart. At least for these people this isn't happening. Why? And it is not as if Benny Hinn is harmless. People are dying because of this. Young children are dying. I am accused of "complaining" when I point this out. It is obvious that there are people literally begging the Holy Spirit to help them, and it isn't happening. No answer is given as to why this is the case, just ignore the issue and declare god good and that should be enough.

 

Ted Haggart was one of the top religious leaders in the country. He spoke with the President of the United States and his cabinet every Monday. In case anyone doesn't know or forgot, the President of the United States has at his fingertips enough firepower to destroy the Earth ten times over. He trusts Ted Haggart, and think he is a man of god. Bush is a believer, too. Ted Haggart has spoked openly about homosexuality being a sin, and drug abuse a cancer on our society (the latter being true.) Well, lo and behold not only did he have a gay lover and see male prostitutes, he used methamphetamine, or "crank", the worst drug there is. I have seen with my own eyes the lives it has wrecked.

 

How is it that the President, a devout believer, was not made aware of Haggart's behavior by the Holy Spirit? Am I the only one alarmed by the fact that a crank addled liar is talking to the President of the United States every Monday--and is getting spiritual advice from him? They both believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old and that Jesus is coming soon. It is now possible to assume that the reason we are in Iraq and thousands of loyal, patriotic Americans are DEAD because of the musings of a meth-head. Maybe I am complaining a little bit here, but I am a citizen and I vote, so I have every right to. The point is that the President showed extremely poor judgment in his choice of associates, and he did so because they believe the same way about god.

 

It has also been asserted that without the Holy Spirit, you cannot interpret the Bible correctly. How can it then be that there are AT LEAST 1500 different Christian sects, all with a different interpretation of scripture? They cannot all be right, can they? How is it that all these believers are communing with the Holy Spirit but getting different answers? I will listen to the crickets chirp some more waiting for an answer.

 

For me, have no anointing whatsoever concerning any types of confrontations, it's taken years to balance the people pleasing thing, also to not let things build up then blow up.

 

I'd never blow up if people wouldn't be rude. And nobody's perfect, and I am quick to forgive, as I hope people would be with me.

 

This may sound bad, although it is not mean't to, and if I have a wrong heart, I pray God changes it....I care, and am happy when others get saved, although know I can't change anyone, and lack Gods power in this area....also can't say I respect belief systems that I know are wrong, and don't desire to change the persons thinking at all.

 

That is another question, too. Given the way that you "know" things, how do you determine which belief systems are wrong? Since you are not a Muslim, you must have some criteria for judging that belief system to be wrong. What is it? Perhaps you apply healthy skepticism to it, as I do. Or does it not "feel" right? Or did you even consider it at all?

 

Am of the opinion that those who become deeply indoctrinated in wrong beliefs are extremely unbalanced and very hard to deal with....I would rather keep the peace and keep it light.....this goes for wrong thinking in believers also.

 

Interesting that you use to term "indoctrinated". While I would certainly agree that there is a level of indoctrination within every religious sect (especially considering how they start with the very young), the principles of rationalism do not lend themselves to indoctrination. There are rules of logic and evidence, and a position either conforms to those or it does not.

 

If you want to make a cake, you follow the recipe. If you deviate in any substantial way, the recipe will not work. Rationalism, and by extension science, is like a cake recipe. And, just like with a cake, the result can be sampled to determine if the recipe was followed. Delicious cake, recipe followed. Recipe followed, reasonable answer.

 

Also, I will change my position immediately (and have) if the evidence demands I do. Can you give me an example of what would change your mind about god? I suspect that there is none, as there is none for most believers. I wasn't one, as I was a bleiver once and now I am not.

 

All I can say, and my only defence is that I love the Lord God with all of my mind, heart and soul and the same with Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit....if the world wants that too, fine if not I am totally confident the His Word never returns void.

 

That last statement is testable, is it not? Just using the Benny Hinn example I gave above, how do you maintain that belief? There are many, many more examples besides that, of course.

[lonelybird]

Having been in many "debates" (so to speak) in my day, either panels of people or one on one....both sides giving reasons/evidence for their stance/belief. At some point one must use wisdom concerning when to quit, as it can lead to anger, hurt feelings, ect...

 

In some cases the sole purpose for debating is changing the other sides veiws, very rarely does this happen in this day and hour, and most are not gifted for this.

 

Lonelybird, you know when to quit, most don't....

 

Island Girl and Moai....believers do use much scripture to answer, make a point ect...the bible to us are the answers, the truth....

 

For me, have no anointing whatsoever concerning any types of confrontations, it's taken years to balance the people pleasing thing, also to not let things build up then blow up.

 

This may sound bad, although it is not mean't to, and if I have a wrong heart, I pray God changes it....I care, and am happy when others get saved, although know I can't change anyone, and lack Gods power in this area....also can't say I respect belief systems that I know are wrong, and don't desire to change the persons thinking at all.

 

Am of the opinion that those who become deeply indoctrinated in wrong beliefs are extremely unbalanced and very hard to deal with....I would rather keep the peace and keep it light.....this goes for wrong thinking in believers also.

 

All I can say, and my only defence is that I love the Lord God with all of my mind, heart and soul and the same with Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit....if the world wants that too, fine if not I am totally confident the His Word never returns void.

Pureinheart

It is so true that each of us has different talents in Lord. I thank Lord for your encouragement and your posts. feel so good to read yours:)

Here the "debate", the only one I can rely on is Holy Spirit. I speak when He want to, I shut up when He want to, this way I won't burn myself up:laugh: . I am in a learning process, sure I hope along the road I can bring many similar with my level to Lord

Look the Bible stories, people got angry at the messagers all the time because the messages they carry. I should learn not take it personal...God help me

 

God bless you, sister:)

[pureinheart]

Pureinheart

It is so true that each of us has different talents in Lord. I thank Lord for your encouragement and your posts. feel so good to read yours:)

Here the "debate", the only one I can rely on is Holy Spirit. I speak when He want to, I shut up when He want to, this way I won't burn myself up:laugh: . I am in a learning process, sure I hope along the road I can bring many similar with my level to Lord

Look the Bible stories, people got angry at the messagers all the time because the messages they carry. I should learn not take it personal...God help me

 

God bless you, sister:)

 

Praise God .....your words popped out at me as revelation knowledge! That is supernatural....it happens sometimes, when the words are anointed and from God they pop out and enter into my heart and mind as the rama word from God! Thank you lonelybird!

[Enema]

Why the b'jesus does everyone ignore Moai's very clear questions?

 

If you're so confident in your religion, answer them!

 

Unrelated: Do you think the word b'jesus arose from "Bastard Jesus"?

[lonelybird]

Why the b'jesus does everyone ignore Moai's very clear questions?

 

If you're so confident in your religion, answer them!

 

Unrelated: Do you think the word b'jesus arose from "Bastard Jesus"?

You brood of vipers! how can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person brings good things out of a good treasure, and the evil person brings evil things out of an evil treasure. I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless words you utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.

[Enema]

More Jesus Speak.

 

For a minute I thought you were going to post something worth a damn.

[Moai]

You brood of vipers! how can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person brings good things out of a good treasure, and the evil person brings evil things out of an evil treasure. I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless words you utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.

 

An interesting observation, and a fallacious one.

 

The truth of a statement is independent from who utters it.

 

For example, if Jeffery Dahmer says that the sky is blue, it does not follow that the sky is NOT blue because Dahmer said it, and he is evil.

 

Another example would be if Idi Amin said the Earth revolves around the Sun. Idi Amin was evil, but what he said was true.

 

Moreover, can we not look at the results of a belief to see if it is evil or not?

 

I think that alienating your own child because of religious condemnation of his/her sexuality is evil. Teens every day kill themselves because they are terrified to come out to their parents, or if they have they are shunned.

 

I think that starvation is terrible, and do what little I can to stop it, and encourage others to do so. Why would Ido this if I were evil?

 

I think that women are equal to, and should have the rights as men, and be paid equally for the same job. Is that an evil idea? Why would I think that way if I were evil? Notice that both the Koran and the Bible disagree with me on this issue.

 

The list goes on. The fact is that your god-belief is not a good barometer as to who is evil and who is not.

[lonelybird]

More Jesus Speak.

 

For a minute I thought you were going to post something worth a damn.

Your avatar is disgusting

[lonelybird]

I think that women are equal to, and should have the rights as men, and be paid equally for the same job. Is that an evil idea? Why would I think that way if I were evil? Notice that both the Koran and the Bible disagree with me on this issue.

 

The list goes on. The fact is that your god-belief is not a good barometer as to who is evil and who is not.

Corinthians

12:13 In the same way, all of us, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether slaves or free, have been baptized into the one body by the same Spirit, and we have all been given the one Spirit to drink.

 

12:14 For the body itself is not made up of only one part, but of many parts.

 

12:15 If the foot were to say, "Because I am not a hand, I don't belong to the body," that would not keep it from being a part of the body.

 

12:16 And if the ear were to say, "Because I am not an eye, I don't belong to the body," that would not keep it from being a part of the body.

 

12:17 If the whole body were just an eye, how could it hear? And if it were only an ear, how could it smell?

 

12:18 As it is, however, God put every different part in the body just as he wanted it to be.

 

12:19 There would not be a body if it were all only one part!

 

12:20 As it is, there are many parts but one body.

 

12:21 So then, the eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!" Nor can the head say to the feet, "Well, I don't need you!"

 

12:22 On the contrary, we cannot do without the parts of the body that seem to be weaker;

 

12:23 and those parts that we think aren't worth very much are the ones which we treat with greater care; while the parts of the body which don't look very nice are treated with special modesty,

 

12:24 which the more beautiful parts do not need. God himself has put the body together in such a way as to give greater honor to those parts that need it.

 

12:25 And so there is no division in the body, but all its different parts have the same concern for one another.

 

12:26 If one part of the body suffers, all the other parts suffer with it; if one part is praised, all the other parts share its happiness.

 

12:27 All of you are Christ's body, and each one is a part of it.

 

12:28 (*)In the church God has put all in place: in the first place apostles, in the second place prophets, and in the third place teachers; then those who perform miracles, followed by those who are given the power to heal or to help others or to direct them or to speak in strange tongues.

 

12:29 They are not all apostles or prophets or teachers. Not everyone has the power to work miracles

 

12:30 or to heal diseases or to speak in strange tongues or to explain what is said.

 

12:31 Set your hearts, then, on the more important gifts. Best of all, however, is the following way.

 

Mt 23:8(1) You must not be called 'Teacher,' because you are all equal and have only one Teacher.

 

Moai, Bible think of "equal" far advance than you

[Enema]

The only good thing about scripture is that anyone can look it up:

 

 

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. (I Timothy 2:11-14)"

 

 

Equal you say?