Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: Khatru on February 26, 2016, 10:08:15 PM
-
That's right, why do Christians pray to their god? I never really got the point.
Millions of Christians will pray to their god and ask for his help, mercy, etc. Yet I keep hearing how the Christian god is all-merciful and good, so why bother begging him to be something that he already is?
Christians also believe in the devil who they see as the source of evil. Perhaps they should ask Satan not to be so evil by praying to him? Christians can't make their god any more merciful than he already is and neither can they make him act in their personal circumstances.
However, praying to the bad guy might get them a result.
-
However, praying to the bad guy might get them a result.
So you would seem to believe that a kingdom divided against itself is more powerful than one united with itself, Khat?
-
So you would seem to believe that a kingdom divided against itself is more powerful than one united with itself, Khat?
Dividing humanity into groups weakens it, and religions have divided us far more than anything else.
-
So you would seem to believe that a kingdom divided against itself is more powerful than one united with itself, Khat?
Given the thousands of different Christian denominations, sects and cults that have emanated from the original source, I'd say that Christianity has done a great job in dividing itself.
In any event, what's that got to do with asking the devil to be less evil?
-
It beats talking to yourself, and he doesn't interrupt with daft questions.
:)
-
It beats talking to yourself, and he doesn't interrupt with daft questions.
:)
My creation of a deity has to listen to me, but isn't permitted to answer back, very useful! ;D ;D ;D
-
That's right, why do Christians pray to their god? I never really got the point.
Millions of Christians will pray to their god and ask for his help, mercy, etc. Yet I keep hearing how the Christian god is all-merciful and good, so why bother begging him to be something that he already is?
Christians also believe in the devil who they see as the source of evil. Perhaps they should ask Satan not to be so evil by praying to him? Christians can't make their god any more merciful than he already is and neither can they make him act in their personal circumstances.
However, praying to the bad guy might get them a result.
I think it was CS Lewis who said ''prayer doesn't change God it changes me''
To use the parent offspring analogy, the daughter talks to the parent, the parent talks back....there is guidance from the parent and petition from the daughter.
Usually the parent comes to their own solution to the child's petition unswayed by what the child wants but what the child needs. Prayer is a parent offspring dialogue.
In terms of evil there is a specific irrational hatred of God and Christ which manifests itself now and then which goes beyond mere disbelief in gods.
-
I think it was CS Lewis who said ''prayer doesn't change God it changes me''
Hardly a ringing endorsement of prayer ...
-
I think it was CS Lewis who said ''prayer doesn't change God it changes me''
To use the parent offspring analogy, the daughter talks to the parent, the parent talks back....there is guidance from the parent and petition from the daughter.
Usually the parent comes to their own solution to the child's petition unswayed by what the child wants but what the child needs. Prayer is a parent offspring dialogue.
In terms of evil there is a specific irrational hatred of God and Christ which manifests itself now and then which goes beyond mere disbelief in gods.
I find this whole parent/child analogy thing bizarre, as though there is one accepted way of parenting and one only.
What Lewis appears to have said is that prayer worked for him as a kind of self reflection, only he labelled his inner guidance 'God'.
-
I think it was CS Lewis who said ''prayer doesn't change God it changes me''
Sounds a bit like singing in the bath for one's own amusement (assuming one is bathing alone).
-
I find this whole parent/child analogy thing bizarre, as though there is one accepted way of parenting and one only.
To me it's not merely bizarre but demeaning and infantilising - I think you said only a few days ago that the ultimate goal of a parent is to raise secure, stable offspring who will grow up to be independent adults not needing parents (which in most cases they won't have anyway, eventually). The analogy in theistic terms seems to encourage a state of perpetual childish dependency.
-
To me it's not merely bizarre but demeaning and infantilising - I think you said only a few days ago that the ultimate goal of a parent is to raise secure, stable offspring who will grow up not to need parents (which in most cases they won't have anyway, eventually). The analogy in theistic terms seems to encourage a state of perpetual childish dependency.
Unfortunately, it works very well on susceptible minds.
-
To me it's not merely bizarre but demeaning and infantilising - I think you said only a few days ago that the ultimate goal of a parent is to raise secure, stable offspring who will grow up to be independent adults not needing parents (which in most cases they won't have anyway, eventually). The analogy in theistic terms seems to encourage a state of perpetual childish dependency.
Yes. When Vlad and Hope describe God as a parent it is on the assumption that we all agree what being a good and loving parent is, and that is what I find bizarre. But also as you say there is no end goal - no independence from God, just a perpetual cycle of need, trying to please and shame/remorse/repentance at never measuring up.
-
"Pray in secret as God dwells and responds in secret and not advertise false piety to others. Don’t use foolish repetitions or verbosity. God already knows your needs before you ask."
Matt 6 6:8
-
A lot of people - the lucky ones, certainly - love their parents; but they also want to live their own independent lives in their own way and on their own terms, forming their own views and doing their own thing. Actively wanting a parent figure as an adult is indicative of something immature and even unhealthy.
-
God already knows your needs before you ask."
Matt 6 6:8
Which then leads on to the torrent of excuses and (ir)rationalisations from the usual suspects as to why those needs aren't met.
-
Which then leads on to the torrent of excuses and (ir)rationalisations from the usual suspects as to why those needs aren't met.
... and why pray at all.
-
... and why pray at all.
Well, quite.
-
A lot of people - the lucky ones, certainly - love their parents; but they also want to live their own independent lives in their own way and on their own terms, forming their own views and doing their own thing. Actively wanting a parent figure as an adult is indicative of something immature and even unhealthy.
It's fear-based, surely? A need to retreat to the (often fantasy) safety of childhood.
-
It's fear-based, surely? A need to retreat to the (often fantasy) safety of childhood.
Yes, you're right.
Unless you have a downright abusive upbringing there's certainly a very real safety offered by good parents/parenting; it should surprise nobody that, coming so early in life as it does, that remains the ideal haven to which it would be wonderful to return no matter how old we are.
Unfortunately it can't be done, save in the imagination.
-
In terms of evil there is a specific irrational hatred of God and Christ which manifests itself now and then which goes beyond mere disbelief in gods.
That would be nothing to do with irrationality and everything to do with the devil whispering in someone's ear surely?
Just ask Alan Burns, he'll put you right on that. ::)
-
Yes, you're right.
Unless you have a downright abusive upbringing there's certainly a very real safety offered by good parents/parenting; it should surprise nobody that, coming so early in life as it does, that remains the ideal haven to which it would be wonderful to return no matter how old we are.
Unfortunately it can't be done, save in the imagination.
And what the religious ideal of God as Father offers for those who don't have the memories of feeling safe to draw upon is a substitute in adulthood for what was missing in childhood. As indeed does much of the myth and imagery around the Virgin Mary in Catholicism.
-
Dividing humanity into groups weakens it, and religions have divided us far more than anything else.
I think you will find that what Khat was getting at was the idea that Satan woud be able to better resolve the trouble that he has caused so that we ought to be praying to him. Unfortunately, that would involve Satan's 'kingdom' being divided against itself
-
In any event, what's that got to do with asking the devil to be less evil?
It has to do with asking Satan not to act according to his nature.
-
Hardly a ringing endorsement of prayer ...
Actually, a ringing endorsement of prayer is exactly what it is. The point of Christianity is that it should lead to the improvement of people, and often prayer gets one to understand that you can be the answer to that prayer.
-
Actually, a ringing endorsement of prayer is exactly what it is.
Not if you hold the opinion of Lewis that I do, it ain't.
The point of Christianity
I'm delighted that somebody claims to have come up with one at last.
is that it should lead to the improvement of people
So it's as superfluous as ever, then, given that most people who are not in some way damaged (perhaps by early life events) work that one out for themselves by a little introspection, some thought as to the effect of their actions on others and the deployment of their evolutionarily-bestowed empathy.
-
A lot of people - the lucky ones, certainly - love their parents; but they also want to live their own independent lives in their own way and on their own terms, forming their own views and doing their own thing. Actively wanting a parent figure as an adult is indicative of something immature and even unhealthy.
Unfortunately, none of us are able to "live their own independent lives in their own way and on their own terms, forming their own views and doing their own thing". We have social mores to adhere to, we have legislation to restrict our behaviour to, we are beholden to other human beings for our existence and being. As John Donne says, 'No man is an island, complete unto himself'.
To think that one can be independent, live life on one's own terms and doing one's own things' is to be hugely naive. Even forming one's own views is a misnomer - unless one isolates oneself to the extent that you don't read/listen to/converse with anyone else.
-
... none of which yawn-making waffle has anything to do with a parent-child relationship and the infantilising effect of a permanent divine parent, which was actually the substance of the discussion at that point.
-
Dear Shaker,
To me it's not merely bizarre but demeaning and infantilising - I think you said only a few days ago that the ultimate goal of a parent is to raise secure, stable offspring who will grow up to be independent adults not needing parents (which in most cases they won't have anyway, eventually). The analogy in theistic terms seems to encourage a state of perpetual childish dependency.
Not often you are wrong, but............
Independent adults not needing parents, now who might they be?
The analogy in theistic terms seems to encourage a state of perpetual childish dependency.
No, we grow up but the Father is still there for advice and guidance, just like my earthly Mother and Father who are both dead but still there for advice and guidance.
Gonnagle.
-
Some adults might need advice and guidance from their parents, others would be better off without it. The only advice you would get from god, if it existed, was how to be evil! >:(
-
Some adults might need advice and guidance from their parents
I've met people for whom the reverse is very much the case.
-
I've met people for whom the reverse is very much the case.
So have I, me for instance!
-
If it is all about the person praying rather than the deity being prayed to why to people talk about their prayers being answered?
-
Yes, you're right.
Unless you have a downright abusive upbringing there's certainly a very real safety offered by good parents/parenting; it should surprise nobody that, coming so early in life as it does, that remains the ideal haven to which it would be wonderful to return no matter how old we are.
Unfortunately it can't be done, save in the imagination.
I sometimes wonder about the childhoods of some of the more, God is some sort of terminator, Christians.
Not everyone has the same father figure, and maybe their veiw was coloured by what they expect of a parent.
-
That's right, why do Christians pray to their god? I never really got the point.
Don't you talk to your father?
-
Don't you talk to your father?
The blanky deity isn't anyone's father! ::)
-
Don't you talk to your father?
Some people don't talk to their fathers while they're alive; all of them find it incredibly difficult to hold a proper conversation if they're dead.
-
Some people don't talk to their fathers while they're alive; all of them find it incredibly difficult to hold a proper conversation if they're dead.
Not unless you use a medium! ;D ;D ;D
-
The blanky deity isn't anyone's father! ::)
And you have evidence to prove this assertion, Floo?
-
And you have evidence to prove this assertion, Floo?
That's the default position.
YOU have to demonstrate that it DOES exist.
YOU have the burden of proof, as you are making the claim that something actually exists.
-
And you have evidence to prove this assertion, Floo?
You can't prove it exists let alone is anyone's father. If it was it would deemed totally unsuitable in today's society!
-
The only advice you would get from god, if it existed, was how to be evil! >:(
Again, what is your evidence for this assertion, Floo? I do agree, however, with your previous point that some people like to be able to talkj with an get advice from their parents. My father died when I was 28 and I have always felt that I missed out on discussing some of the big events of my subsequent life with him. I have been very fortunate to be able to find a couple of older folk with whom I have been able to talk through issues and concerns in an open manner. One a fellow Christian, one a fellow railway enthusiast.
-
Again, what is your evidence for this assertion, Floo? I do agree, however, with your previous point that some people like to be able to talkj with an get advice from their parents. My father died when I was 28 and I have always felt that I missed out on discussing some of the big events of my subsequent life with him. I have been very fortunate to be able to find a couple of older folk with whom I have been able to talk through issues and concerns in an open manner. One a fellow Christian, one a fellow railway enthusiast.
You obviously haven't read the Bible!
Some people might get good advice from their parents, others certainly wouldn't!
-
You can't prove it exists let alone is anyone's father. If it was it would deemed totally unsuitable in today's society!
Again, that's two totally unsupported assertions, Floo? I'm afraid that you can't use assertions as evidence. As for your second point, unconditional love seesm to be a serious plus as far as modern society is concerned. It is something that I seen all too little of amongst some of the people I've worked wih.
-
Again, that's two totally unsupported assertions, Floo? I'm afraid that you can't use assertions as evidence. As for your second point, unconditional love seesm to be a serious plus as far as modern society is concerned. It is something that I seen all too little of amongst some of the people I've worked wih.
You asserted this god into existence in the first place, so it can be ignored until you have compelling evidence.
Piling assertion upon assertion does not count.
-
Again, that's two totally unsupported assertions, Floo? I'm afraid that you can't use assertions as evidence.
And my Spetsnaz-spec. ironymeter becomes a scattered, smoking heap of cogs and bolts on the floor yet again.
-
Again, that's two totally unsupported assertions, Floo? I'm afraid that you can't use assertions as evidence. As for your second point, unconditional love seesm to be a serious plus as far as modern society is concerned. It is something that I seen all too little of amongst some of the people I've worked wih.
Hope that is good one, coming from the master of assertions. ;D
The default position must be disbelief, until fairy stories, like those in the not so good book, have evidence provided to prove they have veracity!
-
You obviously haven't read the Bible!
It is precisely because I have read the Bible that I've challenged your assertions. I accept that anything that doesn't pass a 21st century AD filter is unacceptable to you - but sadly, we've only had 15 or so years of the 21st century so judging anything outside that period by 21st century filters is unrealistic. I suspect that you would regard the various Poor Laws passed in the 1800s - aimed at improving the welfare of the poor - as 'unacceptable'. By today's standards they clearly are, but without them we would likely not have today's laws in the first place.
Some people might get good advice from their parents, others certainly wouldn't!
I wouldn't disagree, but on the strength of the advice I got from my father (and mother) during my first 28 years of life, I don't doubt that I would have continued to get this level of advice from my father.
-
It is precisely because I have read the Bible that I've challenged your assertions. I accept that anything that doesn't pass a 21st century AD filter is unacceptable to you - but sadly, we've only had 15 or so years of the 21st century so judging anything outside that period by 21st century filters is unrealistic. I suspect that you would regard the various Poor Laws passed in the 1800s - aimed at improving the welfare of the poor - as 'unacceptable'. By today's standards they clearly are, but without them we would likely not have today's laws in the first place.
I wouldn't disagree, but on the strength of the advice I got from my father (and mother) during my first 28 years of life, I don't doubt that I would have continued to get this level of advice from my father.
So are you trying to say we should take what is in the Bible with a big pinch of salt?
-
And what book and chapters are reading today floo. Too funny!
-
That's right, why do Christians pray to their god? I never really got the point.
Millions of Christians will pray to their god and ask for his help, mercy, etc. Yet I keep hearing how the Christian god is all-merciful and good, so why bother begging him to be something that he already is?
Christians also believe in the devil who they see as the source of evil. Perhaps they should ask Satan not to be so evil by praying to him? Christians can't make their god any more merciful than he already is and neither can they make him act in their personal circumstances.
However, praying to the bad guy might get them a result.
Have you studied anything to do with Christianity? Your threads suggest NOT.
God has already provided for us before we ask.
King James Bible
And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.
And if you really understood God and Satan, you would never have written this thread.
-
Have you studied anything to do with Christianity? Your threads suggest NOT.
God has already provided for us before we ask.
And if you really understood God and Satan, you would never have written this thread.
From the evidence of Christians themselves, very few of them "understand God and Satan".
-
Have you studied anything to do with Christianity? Your threads suggest NOT.
God has already provided for us before we ask.
And if you really understood God and Satan, you would never have written this thread.
One has got to hand it to Sass she has the makings of a stand up comedian! ;D
-
I think it was CS Lewis who said ''prayer doesn't change God it changes me''
To use the parent offspring analogy, the daughter talks to the parent, the parent talks back....there is guidance from the parent and petition from the daughter.
Usually the parent comes to their own solution to the child's petition unswayed by what the child wants but what the child needs. Prayer is a parent offspring dialogue.
Sounds like one of the items on my list of stock Christian responses: The one about adopting a child's perspective.
In terms of evil there is a specific irrational hatred of God and Christ which manifests itself now and then which goes beyond mere disbelief in gods.
We can hardly hate that which we don't believe exists. That would be like hating the Dark Lord Sauron.
When it comes to hating other deities, that's the Christian's department. Why your own holy book contains instructions to kill those who practice freedom of religion.
-
One has got to hand it to Sass she has the makings of a stand up comedian! ;D
I disagree - although the end effect can be decidedly otherwise, stand-ups are at least supposed to make an effort to be funny.
-
It has to do with asking Satan not to act according to his nature.
Is that the nature that your god endowed him with?
What's the harm in asking Satan to tone his God-given evil down a bit?
-
Actually, a ringing endorsement of prayer is exactly what it is. The point of Christianity is that it should lead to the improvement of people, and often prayer gets one to understand that you can be the answer to that prayer.
Of course, Christianity has no monopoly on prayer and what you say can be applied to any religion.
-
Have you studied anything to do with Christianity? Your threads suggest NOT.
God has already provided for us before we ask.
And if you really understood God and Satan, you would never have written this thread.
I don't understand because I'm not a biblical scholar
I don't understand because, unlike you, I'm not a "true Christian"
-
I disagree - although the end effect can be decidedly otherwise, stand-ups are at least supposed to make an effort to be funny.
Just before Sass wrote that, she 'felt a bit funny', so her ...........
Oh no I've turned into Vlad! :-[
-
From the evidence of Christians themselves, very few of them "understand God and Satan".
You are not in a position to know if that is true...are you?
Evidence is something you cannot recognise spiritually.
-
You are not in a position to know if that is true...are you?
Evidence is something you cannot recognise spiritually.
Evidence is something you definitely don't have, Sass! ::)
-
Evidence is something you definitely don't have, Sass! ::)
It's only you Floo... the atheists do not respect you and all know you haven't a clue about Christianity.
Not viable as a weapon for atheism against Christianity and more likely to cause atheism embarrassment than anything else.
Keep up the good work, Floo. Atheists... Keep on supporting your embarrassment.
-
It's only you Floo... the atheists do not respect you and all know you haven't a clue about Christianity.
Not viable as a weapon for atheism against Christianity and more likely to cause atheism embarrassment than anything else.
Keep up the good work, Floo. Atheists... Keep on supporting your embarrassment.
And you know that for a fact do you, or are your talking out of your rear end as usual?
I think I probably know a lot more about Christianity than you. I don't think there are too many Christians who see it your way, judging by some of the remarks directed at you by them over the years?
-
And you know that for a fact do you, or are your talking out of your rear end as usual?
I think I probably know a lot more about Christianity than you. I don't think there are too many Christians who see it your way, judging by some of the remarks directed at you by them over the years?
Poor thing... Christianity.... know a lot more... there again you show you know absolutely nothing about Christianity.
It is not a seeing of a way it is about Spirit and Truth. Don't worry you haven't the knowledge to even know when to be embarrassed about your ignorance showing.
-
Well at least some of Sass's posts make me giggle! ;D
-
Poor thing... Christianity.... know a lot more... there again you show you know absolutely nothing about Christianity.
It is not a seeing of a way it is about Spirit and Truth. Don't worry you haven't the knowledge to even know when to be embarrassed about your ignorance showing.
Don't be such an ignorant, rude old bag, Sass. >:(
-
Poor thing... Christianity.... know a lot more... there again you show you know absolutely nothing about Christianity.
It is not a seeing of a way it is about Spirit and Truth. Don't worry you haven't the knowledge to even know when to be embarrassed about your ignorance showing.
Trouble is, you can't tell the difference between your god and a figment of your imagination.
Lighten up, Sass.
Try some hilarious black comedy.
Perhaps you should read James Morrow’s “Godhead Trilogy”
Towing Jehovah
God has committed suicide. His gigantic body is adrift in the north Atlantic where it remains a menace to faith and shipping. It must be God's body because it’s two miles long and doesn't have a bellybutton. The heavenly host who are dying off very quickly from sympathetic death syndrome have hired an oil tanker captain to tow the body to the North Pole where they plan to lay Jehovah to rest.
Along the way they have various adventures and at one point they get becalmed and are practically dying of starvation until they realise they have two miles of meat in tow. The book does contain some recipes.
Blameless in Abbadon
This is the next book in the series. Here you can read how the body of God never made it to its final resting place - instead becoming the centre of attraction at a South Carolina amusement park. A short time afterwards a man dying of cancer puts God's corpse on trial for the existence of evil. You'll probably enjoy the part where they take a walk through God's brain where they encounter several saints, and heroes from the Bible. Among these characters we meet the colossally perverted Saint Augustine of Hippo, Lot, his pregnant daughters and his transformed wife. Lot carries her around wherever he goes because he's drilled a hole in a position he can use (his daughters have lost interest) and besides, she's very useful when it comes to salting margaritas.
Eternal Footman
The final instalment - God's bloated corpse has exploded and his huge skull has made it into orbit.
This bit is straight out of the book....
Cirrus clouds rimmed God's skull. He appeared to be wearing a white toupee. At least there weren't any ads today. Why the Vatican permitted the multinationals to aim their lasers at His brow was a mystery she couldn't fathom. Contemplating the Cranium Dei was depressing enough. You shouldn't have to read COKE IS IT in the bargain.
-
To me it's not merely bizarre but demeaning and infantilising - I think you said only a few days ago that the ultimate goal of a parent is to raise secure, stable offspring who will grow up to be independent adults not needing parents (which in most cases they won't have anyway, eventually). The analogy in theistic terms seems to encourage a state of perpetual childish dependency.
Mark 10:15 indeed
-
Mark 10:15 indeed
Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”
Silly nonsense! If Jesus was correctly reported he spoke out of his rear end from time to time! ::)
-
Mark 10:15 indeed
1 Corinthians 13:11 indeed.
-
1 Corinthians 13:11 indeed.
When I was a child, I spoke like a child, thought like a child, and reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up my childish ways.
Exactly!
-
Trouble is, you can't tell the difference between your god and a figment of your imagination.
Lighten up, Sass.
Try some hilarious black comedy.
Perhaps you should read James Morrow’s “Godhead Trilogy”
Towing Jehovah
God has committed suicide. His gigantic body is adrift in the north Atlantic where it remains a menace to faith and shipping. It must be God's body because it’s two miles long and doesn't have a bellybutton. The heavenly host who are dying off very quickly from sympathetic death syndrome have hired an oil tanker captain to tow the body to the North Pole where they plan to lay Jehovah to rest.
Along the way they have various adventures and at one point they get becalmed and are practically dying of starvation until they realise they have two miles of meat in tow. The book does contain some recipes.
Blameless in Abbadon
This is the next book in the series. Here you can read how the body of God never made it to its final resting place - instead becoming the centre of attraction at a South Carolina amusement park. A short time afterwards a man dying of cancer puts God's corpse on trial for the existence of evil. You'll probably enjoy the part where they take a walk through God's brain where they encounter several saints, and heroes from the Bible. Among these characters we meet the colossally perverted Saint Augustine of Hippo, Lot, his pregnant daughters and his transformed wife. Lot carries her around wherever he goes because he's drilled a hole in a position he can use (his daughters have lost interest) and besides, she's very useful when it comes to salting margaritas.
Eternal Footman
The final instalment - God's bloated corpse has exploded and his huge skull has made it into orbit.
This bit is straight out of the book....
I see the author is as given to pretentious shite as you are.......IMHO.
-
I see the author is as given to pretentious shite as you are.......IMHO.
Not as pretentious as claiming the universe was created for me and that same creator died for me.
James Morrow writes like Kurt Vonnegut. You should check him out.
-
When I was a child, I spoke like a child, thought like a child, and reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up my childish ways.
Exactly!
I've never become a man, that's my excuse :P ;)
-
Not as pretentious as claiming the universe was created for me and that same creator died for me.
James Morrow writes like Kurt Vonnegut. You should check him out.
I never detected an overarching antitheist axe grind in Vonnegut.
Mind you who says that wouldn't be true if Vonnegut were writing today......After all ''thar's gold in them there New Atheist tomes''.
-
Trouble is, you can't tell the difference between your god and a figment of your imagination.
Lighten up, Sass.
Try some hilarious black comedy.
I see the truth is getting to you.
My truth is real I have no reason to let anything bring me down. Jesus is alive and sat at the right hand of God.
What makes you think I require lightening up?
Is that all Christianity and religion means to you? Is everything you write about trying to score points, insult those with faith or make them angry? It is futile and pointless...
All you do is reassure us what Christ says is true.
Matthew 5:11-12King James Version (KJV)
11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
I see no reason to let anything get us down. Christ gives us greater insight and we know the truth.
Perhaps you should read James Morrow’s “Godhead Trilogy”
Towing Jehovah
God has committed suicide. His gigantic body is adrift in the north Atlantic where it remains a menace to faith and shipping. It must be God's body because it’s two miles long and doesn't have a bellybutton. The heavenly host who are dying off very quickly from sympathetic death syndrome have hired an oil tanker captain to tow the body to the North Pole where they plan to lay Jehovah to rest.
Perhaps you should read the bible... King James Bible
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
How do you drag a spirit????
Flights of fancy and ridicule. God loves you so much he sent his son to die for you.
Would you send your son to die for someone like you?
I guess that somewhere inside the truth about God eats you up so much that you look for all different ways to try and make it untrue about Christ. But in the end Christ hurt no other human being. He dedicated his life to healing, uplifting and reassuring those whom humanity treated as the lowest of the lowest. I believe somewhere inside you, you know God and Christ have been reaching out to heal mankind. You must be breaking within and that is sad. :(
Along the way they have various adventures and at one point they get becalmed and are practically dying of starvation until they realise they have two miles of meat in tow. The book does contain some recipes.
Blameless in Abbadon
This is the next book in the series. Here you can read how the body of God never made it to its final resting place - instead becoming the centre of attraction at a South Carolina amusement park. A short time afterwards a man dying of cancer puts God's corpse on trial for the existence of evil. You'll probably enjoy the part where they take a walk through God's brain where they encounter several saints, and heroes from the Bible. Among these characters we meet the colossally perverted Saint Augustine of Hippo, Lot, his pregnant daughters and his transformed wife. Lot carries her around wherever he goes because he's drilled a hole in a position he can use (his daughters have lost interest) and besides, she's very useful when it comes to salting margaritas.
Eternal Footman
The final instalment - God's bloated corpse has exploded and his huge skull has made it into orbit.
This bit is straight out of the book....
But isn't it, and wouldn't it be sad that anyone sure of their own self and secure in their own existence would actually find anything positive or necessary in such diabolical rubbish.
If I were you I would question if secure in what you believe you need to fill your brain or anyone elses with such effortless rubbish. The guy is laughing all the way to the bank with your money. But it did nothing for you, did it.
I personally if an atheist would not have displayed such utter junk or thought it useful for a thread.
Do yourself a favour. Read the bible, it will stop you looking foolish when you write something that the bible shows totally off the scale and improbable by all accounts..
I did not realise how badly Christ and God are a struggle for you.
-
Reading the Bible, if you have actually done so Sass, never stopped you looking foolish! ;D
-
You've read the Bible, though, floo, haven't you?
-
There's no harm in reading the Bible, in fact most of the edicts attributed to Jesus are good advice. The harm is done by believing all the fantasy stuff.
-
I never detected an overarching antitheist axe grind in Vonnegut.
Mind you who says that wouldn't be true if Vonnegut were writing today......After all ''thar's gold in them there New Atheist tomes''.
I was thinking the similarity was more in style rather than intent.
Still, check him out if you're curious. He's good with the satire albeit sometimes it strays into the ludicrous.
-
There's no harm in reading the Bible, in fact most of the edicts attributed to Jesus are good advice. The harm is done by believing all the fantasy stuff.
I agree the Bible does contain some sensible things including much, if not all, which is attributed to Jesus. It is, as you say, the fantasy element, which often does harm.
-
Do yourself a favour. Read the bible, it will stop you looking foolish when you write something that the bible shows totally off the scale and improbable by all accounts..
Giants, unicorns, cockatrices, dragons, a talking snake and donkey, people living to close on a thousand years, the sun in orbit around a flat earth, a flood that covers the entire world, thousands of people coming back from the dead. Telepathic communication with a zombie carpenter. Genetically modifying goats by floating tree bark in their water trough, You think all of that is for real and not in the least bit "off the scale" as you say?
I did not realise how badly Christ and God are a struggle for you.
Why do you insist on trying to drape me with your myth and superstitious mumbo jumbo? I don't need your ju-ju, because unlike you, my world view is based on and commensurate with evidence. You know....real and tangible truths not fairy tales.
No doubt you're on a misguided quest to convince me that my rational scepticism is absolutely the same as your blind faith. You accept dogma, myth and superstition. Do you honestly believe that using your ju-ju against me is an argument?
I've already mentioned this in another thread - I'll quote it here....
Ah, OK...so you believe that we non-believers are under Satan's control?
Here's a heads-up for you - that just happens to be your religion - it's certainly not mine.
Why is it that believers like you, people who accept faith, dogma and religion think it's an argument to use those words like "Satan is your father" against somebody else?
What if I called you a "stupid forum poster" simply because I considered that you didn't consider yourself a stupid forum poster? Isn't that your approach here?
I'll tell you what - let's be sensible about this. What do you say I call you the religite who clings to faith and dogma. Ok? Then you can insult me right back with the opposite; you know, something that you actually disrespect.
You see what I'm getting at?
Call me a damned rational sceptic. Call me a filthy logician or reasonista. Hey! You can even call me a godless evidencist.
Come on, Sass - hit me where I really live!
-
Giants, unicorns, cockatrices, dragons, a talking snake and donkey, people living to close on a thousand years, the sun in orbit around a flat earth, a flood that covers the entire world, thousands of people coming back from the dead. Telepathic communication with a zombie carpenter. Genetically modifying goats by floating tree bark in their water trough, You think all of that is for real and not in the least bit "off the scale" as you say?
Well, it depends on whether you actually take every word as 'gospel' truth, Khat. For instance - the flood report is within a section of Genesis that scholars are increasingly believing was a written long after any such events could have happened and was written as a theological treatise about the all-powerfulness of the Jewish God compared to the gods that the people of Israel had encountered in Babylon. Where does the Bible refer to "Telepathic communication with a zombie carpenter"? As for genetically modifying goats, I understand that this particular trick is a pretty common one. It's as far from genetic modification as you can get, and is simply a case of tanning the animals's fleece.
Giants, unicorns, cockatrices, dragons: I'm assuming that you are still referring to the King James Version, Khat? Giants could well be the case - after all, white men travelling to the East about 150 years ago were deemed to be giants by the Japanese, the Chinese, the peoples of the Indian sub-continent. There are particular tribes in China who are still regarded as 'giants' because of their considerably taller bodies compared to the average Chinese. Similarly, dragons, there a number of animals that are either known as or nicknamed 'dragons'. Specie-ally, I believe that they are generally lizards.
Why do you insist on trying to drape me with your myth and superstitious mumbo jumbo? I don't need your ju-ju, because unlike you, my world view is based on and commensurate with evidence. You know....real and tangible truths not fairy tales.
Perhaps you ought to add an extra word into that 2nd sentence, 'naturalistic' (between 'with' and 'evidence'). After all, do you have any evidence of any sort that that is the sole form of evidence?
No doubt you're on a misguided quest to convince me that my rational scepticism is absolutely the same as your blind faith. You accept dogma, myth and superstition. Do you honestly believe that using your ju-ju against me is an argument?
I doubt whether anyone is on a misguided quest to do anything Khat. They might possibly be on a quest to get you thinking whether what you base you beliefs on is as solid as you like to believe.
I've already mentioned this in another thread - I'll quote it here....
[/quote]
-
Reading the Bible, if you have actually done so Sass, never stopped you looking foolish! ;D
Where is the evidence?
There is a difference between being ridiculed by the ignorant and actually being foolish.
On here you are proof that I am ridiculed by the ignorant rather than the latter.
-
Giants, unicorns, cockatrices, dragons, a talking snake and donkey, people living to close on a thousand years, the sun in orbit around a flat earth, a flood that covers the entire world, thousands of people coming back from the dead. Telepathic communication with a zombie carpenter. Genetically modifying goats by floating tree bark in their water trough, You think all of that is for real and not in the least bit "off the scale" as you say?
Why do you insist on trying to drape me with your myth and superstitious mumbo jumbo? I don't need your ju-ju, because unlike you, my world view is based on and commensurate with evidence. You know....real and tangible truths not fairy tales.
No doubt you're on a misguided quest to convince me that my rational scepticism is absolutely the same as your blind faith. You accept dogma, myth and superstition. Do you honestly believe that using your ju-ju against me is an argument?
I've already mentioned this in another thread - I'll quote it here....
Is that a form of defense or are you just musing your way through hoping no one else sees the cop out?
What you have written has nothing to do with Christianity and is absolutely useless in an discussion about God.
I am wondering where you copied it from. I find the contents laughable. No one educated would use such futile rubbish in a post and think they have actually produced an argument or rebuttal.
If this is the atheist writing of the present future then all religions are safe... that is alarming. :o
-
No one educated would use such futile rubbish in a post and think they have actually produced an argument or rebuttal.
Back to the personal insults, eh, Sass?
I would hazard the guess that Khatru is not only better educated than you, but he is far more intelligent.
-
Back to the personal insults, eh, Sass?
I would hazard the guess that Khatru is not only better educated than you, but he is far more intelligent.
Well you would be wrong as you are with the insults.
No one educated would use such futile rubbish in a post and think they have actually produced an argument or rebuttal.
Being uneducated is not an insult. I said no one educated would use such futile rubbish in a post and think they have actually produced an argument or rebuttal. If you can show using the contents in the place of truth about the subject they have produced an argument or rebuttal please show it us. Otherwise you really show you have reacted as an atheist and not on the level or education regarding what was being discussed. So no insults and if wrong then show us. We BOTH know you cannot so why post the above if not to have dig yourself.
If he was better educated than myself in Christianity then he would be a Christian too, wouldn't he and not would not have been on the end of the reply he got.
-
If he was better educated than myself in Christianity then he would be a Christian too, wouldn't he
By no means, not necessarily. You're conflating 'knowing about' with 'believing in' - two different things entirely. There are innumerable people who know vastly more about Christianity than you ever have or will (not a major feat, admittedly) who don't believe a word of it.
-
By no means, not necessarily. You're conflating 'knowing about' with 'believing in' - two different things entirely. There are innumerable people who know vastly more about Christianity than you ever have or will (not a major feat, admittedly) who don't believe a word of it.
Thanks for saving me the trouble of answering, mate! :)
-
By no means, not necessarily. You're conflating 'knowing about' with 'believing in' - two different things entirely. There are innumerable people who know vastly more about Christianity than you ever have or will (not a major feat, admittedly) who don't believe a word of it.
Well said! Sass only knows what she makes up and believes to be true!
-
By no means, not necessarily. You're conflating 'knowing about' with 'believing in' - two different things entirely. There are innumerable people who know vastly more about Christianity than you ever have or will (not a major feat, admittedly) who don't believe a word of it.
You see how ignorant that comment is...
All atheists will know less about Christianity than any Christian. But the truth is that not all Christians understand what Christ was teaching...
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
Being born of Spirit and Truth is about living as Christ did and in the two commandments. Love God and love your neighbour as yourself. Peoples lives are changed by the power of Gods Spirit within them. It is not something they can do for themselves.
How very worldly your thinking and far away from the truth about God and the teachings of Christ.
You will never be in a spiritual position to understand the truth Christ taught till you can take the steps required to find the truth for yourself.
-
You see how ignorant that comment is...
All atheists will know less about Christianity than any Christian.
I'm not one of them but a great many atheists have been Christians earlier in their lives, you know. Quite a few were religious johnnies - preachers, priests, vicars and what have you.
But the truth is that not all Christians understand what Christ was teaching...
Here comes the No True Scotsman fallacy out for his daily constitutional.
-
So how do you think you're doing at the second of those commandments, Sass?
-
Sass is hilarious, her assertions are fired by her imagination, not knowledge. A six month old baby wouldn't do any worse! ;D
-
I'm not one of them but a great many atheists have been Christians earlier in their lives, you know. Quite a few were religious johnnies - preachers, priests, vicars and what have you. Here comes the No True Scotsman fallacy out for his daily constitutional.
I am sure you know that NOT all come to fruition in their faith. The seed and the sower.
Unless you can actually disprove what Christ said then you are really making it up as you go along...
So many atheists claimed to have believe but they never came to fruition and they fell away.... So we see the inaccuracy in what you yourself belief. How you cannot even fathom the truth of Christ's teachings and why those fallen away never knew God or Jesus Christ.
My post clearly points out how people believing in Christ and doing all those miracles actually never knew him.
Here comes the No True Scotsman fallacy out for his daily constitutional.
Desperation instead of doing what people who really want understanding would do. Anyone actually interested in the truth Christ taught and about Christianity, would have considered what was said by Christ and written in Matthew 7.
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
It is clear that Christ gives two commandments. In obeying Christ we see God and Christ reveal themselves to the believer.
King James Bible
He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
King James Bible
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
God promises something far bigger than a person merely believing. He offers the individual something far greater than just being able to perform miracles by gifts and power. He offers them to know both the Son and the Father who is God.
A personal relationship. For most they never get that far. Even believers doing all the miracles and preaching will not all know Christ. So no fallacy... a fact that not all who preach Christ will actually know him.
-
Unless you can actually disprove what Christ said then you are really making it up as you go along...
... and that's the negative proof fallacy. Don't let Hope know you're using it, he'll be livid.
-
More baseless assertions from Sass!
-
So how do you think you're doing at the second of those commandments, Sass?
Well, had you actually known me, instead of judging me and insulting me, you might have known.
What was it that Rose pointed out to you?
I have no time to feel sorry for myself, I am too busy taking care of others. You might want to try it sometimes.
There are people with bigger problems than ourselves. I am still a work in a progress.
You gave it all up when the worries of this life came in and choked the faith you had.
But the truth is I cannot give up my faith and walk away. No matter what point in my walk I know God is real and Jesus Christ is the Son of God. So no matter how difficult life becomes... no matter how much people like yourself attack me... The truth about God and Christ remains... You like many others are just the testing ground.
Maybe... you could do with some help removing your forest from your eye then you will be able to see clearly enough to remove the speck from mine.
-
As I thought then.
-
I have no time to feel sorry for myself, I am too busy taking care of others. You might want to try it sometimes.
Since Rhiannon has mentioned numerous times that she has children, what makes you assume that she doesn't?
-
... and that's the negative proof fallacy. Don't let Hope know you're using it, he'll be livid.
Ignorance... if there was ever a definition for the dictionary then you and your writings above are the perfect example.
Try reading the post and stop making yourself look a complete pratt.
The King is in the altogether... and you really are as naked as the day that you were born.
May Almighty God, make everyone remember what you have written in this thread to your downfall in the eyes of the educated.
Both those in flesh who get the message Christ told and those in Spirit who see how you have no knowledge of the teachings of Christ. May it be around as long as you post and may all who seek posts by you on the internet find what you wrote here.
In Jesus Name. AMEN.
Now everyone knows Shaker relies on what he reads elsewhere. He has no knowledge of his own. Hence the reason he repeats himself so often. No Shaker you don't and didn't have an argument. Now everyone knows you are the proverbial Ostrich in that you think if you cannot see the truth about yourself, no one else can.
You have just lost all respect. Because no matter what you do and no matter what others think.
If they support you in what you wrote without knowing and reading clearly or inspite of reading clearly. Then like you they become known as having no knowledge of the bible and teachings of Christ. Just repeating what they have heard or read elsewhere. And what they have heard or read in this matter is false. A foolish answer like your own shows you completely naked.
-
Ignorance... if there was ever a definition for the dictionary then you and your writings above are the perfect example.
Try reading the post and stop making yourself look a complete pratt.
... a word which has just the one T, by the way ;)
When you can even spell and write comprehensible English, come back to us and we'll work on your reasoning abilities. That's to say, trying to instil some.
-
... a word which has just the one T, by the way ;)
When you can even spell and write comprehensible English, come back to us and we'll work on your reasoning abilities. That's to say, trying to instil some.
You being accustomed to the use of the word prat.
The rarely-used word "prat" means "the buttocks". Used to mean "a fool or idiot", it should be spelled with one T, although some dictionaries list two T's as an alternate spelling (the spelling used for the proper name Pratt).
Urban dictionary:
TOP DEFINITION
pratt
dim witted
useless
clueless
"you acted like a right pratt last night"
by fletch March 23, 2004
Ignorance... if there was ever a definition for the dictionary then you and your writings above are the perfect example.
Try reading the post and stop making yourself look a complete pratt.
The King is in the altogether... and you really are as naked as the day that you were born.
May Almighty God, make everyone remember what you have written in this thread to your downfall in the eyes of the educated.
Both those in flesh who get the message Christ told and those in Spirit who see how you have no knowledge of the teachings of Christ. May it be around as long as you post and may all who seek posts by you on the internet find what you wrote here.
In Jesus Name. AMEN.
Now everyone knows Shaker relies on what he reads elsewhere. He has no knowledge of his own. Hence the reason he repeats himself so often. No Shaker you don't and didn't have an argument. Now everyone knows you are the proverbial Ostrich in that you think if you cannot see the truth about yourself, no one else can.
You have just lost all respect. Because no matter what you do and no matter what others think.
If they support you in what you wrote without knowing and reading clearly or inspite of reading clearly. Then like you they become known as having no knowledge of the bible and teachings of Christ. Just repeating what they have heard or read elsewhere. And what they have heard or read in this matter is false. A foolish answer like your own shows you completely naked.
I missed a 'T' but as you can see some dictionaries spell it with two. However your clueless and ignorance will never outweigh anything to do with spelling and gramma. The reason being what I write is clearly out of your ability and understanding.
Given the evidence of the thread. And so whilst my missing a T does not show any lack in my knowledge of using the word Prat/tt your writings clearly show a lack of education and knowledge as well as comprehension of God, Christ and the bible teachings from then.
I would say given the evidence I am in the better position. All you can do is insult... I have produced, shown and proved the evidence against you.
-
You being accustomed to the use of the word prat.
Use as in being able to correctly identify them, yes, and also in being able to spell.
I missed a 'T' but as you can see some dictionaries spell it with two.
Including that well-known example of lexicographical rigour, Urban Dictionary ;D
However your clueless
My clueless what?
and ignorance will never outweigh anything to do with spelling and gramma.
The gift that keeps on giving.
-
I missed a 'T' but as you can see some dictionaries spell it with two. However your clueless and ignorance will never outweigh anything to do with spelling and gramma.
Just when you think there can't be any more scope for ironic nonsense - there is!
-
Now everyone knows Shaker relies on what he reads elsewhere.
It's very sad that Sassy regards keeping yourself informed by reading as a negative trait.
-
It's very sad that Sassy regards keeping yourself informed by reading as a negative trait.
Explains a hell of a lot though.
-
Use as in being able to correctly identify them, yes, and also in being able to spell. Including that well-known example of lexicographical rigour, Urban Dictionary ;DMy clueless what?The gift that keeps on giving.
BLAH BLAH BLAH... not fooling anyone... You still cannot change the subject or the fact you are trying to cover your tracks from your blunder...
The above is the usual clueless and mindless attacks we have become use to.
How does it feel everyone knowing you do not understand Christ or Christianity?
That everything you repeat over and over again is what you read or heard somewhere else.
If anything your words are water rolling off a ducks back. I have always said when Atheists don't have an answer they result to insult. And even move goal posts and try to change the subject.. You got a T missing in pratt/t depending on which version you want to use. I have a thread which your replies show you know nothing about Christianity, Christ or even true believers.
I am on the better end... believe me...
-
Just when you think there can't be any more scope for ironic nonsense - there is!
Well Gordon go read the posts and defend him from the original posts we are discussing.
Here we are tell us what he should have understood from the post below.
You are following the one in the wrong. Your credibility is going down slowy.
I am sure you know that NOT all come to fruition in their faith. The seed and the sower.
Unless you can actually disprove what Christ said then you are really making it up as you go along...
So many atheists claimed to have believe but they never came to fruition and they fell away.... So we see the inaccuracy in what you yourself belief. How you cannot even fathom the truth of Christ's teachings and why those fallen away never knew God or Jesus Christ.
My post clearly points out how people believing in Christ and doing all those miracles actually never knew him.
Desperation instead of doing what people who really want understanding would do. Anyone actually interested in the truth Christ taught and about Christianity, would have considered what was said by Christ and written in Matthew 7.
It is clear that Christ gives two commandments. In obeying Christ we see God and Christ reveal themselves to the believer.
God promises something far bigger than a person merely believing. He offers the individual something far greater than just being able to perform miracles by gifts and power. He offers them to know both the Son and the Father who is God.
A personal relationship. For most they never get that far. Even believers doing all the miracles and preaching will not all know Christ. So no fallacy... a fact that not all who preach Christ will actually know him.
-
For Gordon...
By no means, not necessarily. You're conflating 'knowing about' with 'believing in' - two different things entirely. There are innumerable people who know vastly more about Christianity than you ever have or will (not a major feat, admittedly) who don't believe a word of it.
You see how ignorant that comment is...
All atheists will know less about Christianity than any Christian. But the truth is that not all Christians understand what Christ was teaching...
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
Being born of Spirit and Truth is about living as Christ did and in the two commandments. Love God and love your neighbour as yourself. Peoples lives are changed by the power of Gods Spirit within them. It is not something they can do for themselves.
How very worldly your thinking and far away from the truth about God and the teachings of Christ.
You will never be in a spiritual position to understand the truth Christ taught till you can take the steps required to find the truth for yourself.
-
Sass, I alway thought prat (the perjorative term), was spelt with one 't' too, so you are not alone but you are a CYM to use the word so cheekily!
-
Truth is that Shaker should stop replying and answering things he knows NOTHING about.
-
That everything you repeat over and over again is what you read or heard somewhere else.
Says the one who quotes the KJV ad nauseam.
-
Sass, I alway thought prat (the perjorative term), was spelt with one 't' too, so you are not alone but you are a CYM to use the word so cheekily!
I'll never understand Christian tribalism.
-
Sass, I alway thought prat (the perjorative term), was spelt with one 't' too, so you are not alone but you are a CYM to use the word so cheekily!
The point is Shaker made a blunder when replying to a post.
He showed he has no understanding or knowledge of subject concerning the teachings of Christ.
The 'T' was the only thing he could come up with by way of reply.
He could not actually defend himself on the matter at hand.
I think like many things only fools would defend him at this point and doing so without actually reading what has been written.
If they read the thread they will see the blunder he made. Had he any sense he would admit he blundered and if it was because he did not know or did not read the posts.
Have a good day B,...
-
Sass, surely you could try to wind the spite in a bit?
-
Sass, surely you could try to wind the spite in a bit?
Spite... no wonder you lost your faith if you think truth is spite.
Practice what you preach... after all you know Shaker is in the wrong and started the nasty insults. Double standards is something God hates.
King James Bible
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isn't that what you have done... put the false/evil for Good/Christ.
You swopped faith in the true God and his Son for something you know to be false?
And now you support what is false in place of the truth... even worse calling truth, evil. And making evil out to be good.
There is no spite there is just your lost sense of direction and you swopping the truth for a lie.
Do you not see your own reflections on the things you are allowing into your life.
No spite... no evil reasons or purpose for what I have said... just the truth.
-
.......................Have a good day B,...
Thanks, you too :D.
-
Spite... no wonder you lost your faith if you think truth is spite.
Practice what you preach... after all you know Shaker is in the wrong and started the nasty insults. Double standards is something God hates.
King James Bible
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isn't that what you have done... put the false/evil for Good/Christ.
You swopped faith in the true God and his Son for something you know to be false?
And now you support what is false in place of the truth... even worse calling truth, evil. And making evil out to be good.
There is no spite there is just your lost sense of direction and you swopping the truth for a lie.
Do you not see your own reflections on the things you are allowing into your life.
No spite... no evil reasons or purpose for what I have said... just the truth.
Sass and truth! That is an oxymoron! ::)
-
Certainly some kind of moron.
-
Sassy,
You also think the Moon has no gravity.
That is NOT true, so you believe things that are not true.
-
Now everyone knows Shaker relies on what he reads elsewhere.
Did you find Jesus and/or God, before or after you read the bible?
-
Did you find Jesus and/or God, before or after you read the bible?
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Yes, "God" got in touch with her before she could read and set the ball rolling! ;)
-
I had a sense of God before reading the Bible, when I was a small child. I wouldn't have identified it as such, didn't have the words, but I felt there was a benign but unseen presence taking care of me. You may think I invented that or that my immature psyche created it to fulfill a need. I really don't know but I certainly felt it. Very good it was too. I used to draw pictures and if I drew myself, I was always surrounded but not obscured by fluffy clouds, gentle sunshine, attractive surroundings (I was a good draw-er for my age).
As I got older it went and I felt cold and isolated. Something else took the place of what I now call ''God'' but it wasn't always effective and was less comfortable. I still have that but occasionally I recapture the wonderful feeling of being nurtured that I had when I was small.
So you have my musings and please don't suggest medication or call the shrink. I don't believe there is anything unusual about what I have described but people often don't remember or perhaps it didn't last so long for them.
-
I had a sense of God before reading the Bible, when I was a small child. I wouldn't have identified it as such, didn't have the words, but I felt there was a benign but unseen presence taking care of me. You may think I invented that or that my immature psyche created it to fulfill a need. I really don't know but I certainly felt it. Very good it was too. I used to draw pictures and if I drew myself, I was always surrounded but not obscured by fluffy clouds, gentle sunshine, attractive surroundings (I was a good draw-er for my age).
As I got older it went and I felt cold and isolated. Something else took the place of what I now call ''God'' but it wasn't always effective and was less comfortable. I still have that but occasionally I recapture the wonderful feeling of being nurtured that I had when I was small.
So you have my musings and please don't suggest medication or call the shrink. I don't believe there is anything unusual about what I have described but people often don't remember or perhaps it didn't last so long for them.
It was the good fairy protecting you from the wicked witch of the west! :)
-
Now who would that be, pray/prey?
-
Now who would that be, pray/prey?
Just a fairy tale characters invented by the juvenile mind for comfort.
-
I had a sense of God before reading the Bible, when I was a small child. I wouldn't have identified it as such, didn't have the words, but I felt there was a benign but unseen presence taking care of me. You may think I invented that or that my immature psyche created it to fulfill a need. I really don't know but I certainly felt it. Very good it was too. I used to draw pictures and if I drew myself, I was always surrounded but not obscured by fluffy clouds, gentle sunshine, attractive surroundings (I was a good draw-er for my age).
As I got older it went and I felt cold and isolated. Something else took the place of what I now call ''God'' but it wasn't always effective and was less comfortable. I still have that but occasionally I recapture the wonderful feeling of being nurtured that I had when I was small.
So you have my musings and please don't suggest medication or call the shrink. I don't believe there is anything unusual about what I have described but people often don't remember or perhaps it didn't last so long for them.
Which is why I dispute the claim that babies are default atheists :)
-
Which is why I dispute the claim that babies are default atheists :)
How would you describe them then in regard to that topic?
-
How would you describe them then in regard to that topic?
Open minded.
-
Open minded.
In what way?
-
Open minded.
No, they do not believe in a God until someone tells them about a God. How could they?
Therefore they are atheists.
-
No, they do not believe in a God until someone tells them about a God. How could they?
Therefore they are atheists.
Untrue, like Brownie, I believed and sensed God being around without being told.
I can remember back to being sat in my pram.
A baby is innocent in that they can speak no evil and have committed no sin of themselves.
Gods love and truth will never pass from the earth. I think it sad that anyone would think a baby an atheist.
Can a baby in infancy really believe or disbelief as to make sense of God in the world of adulthood?
I think it is going to far to bring babies into this. Children are far more trusting than adults.
-
They certainly are. I always had a sense of a caring, higher power to which I could not put a name, from when I was really tiny - and it was nothing to do with my parents. I was not surrounded by 'churchy' people, my family did not go to church and faith was never talked about. When I started school I had religious education but prior to that, there was nothing.
This will undoubtedly sound vague to a non-believer but no matter.
-
They certainly are. I always had a sense of a caring, higher power to which I could not put a name, from when I was really tiny - and it was nothing to do with my parents. I was not surrounded by 'churchy' people, my family did not go to church and faith was never talked about. When I started school I had religious education but prior to that, there was nothing.
This will undoubtedly sound vague to a non-believer but no matter.
I believe children sense God more than adults because they are innocent and close to the truth than adults.
I feel that somehow God has always lead me through my life. Things make sense with God.
None-believers somehow lose that sensitivity to God as they grow older. But for me God has always been around. Same for you too, probably. :)
-
They certainly are. I always had a sense of a caring, higher power to which I could not put a name, from when I was really tiny - and it was nothing to do with my parents. I was not surrounded by 'churchy' people, my family did not go to church and faith was never talked about. When I started school I had religious education but prior to that, there was nothing.
This will undoubtedly sound vague to a non-believer but no matter.
Yes, I was the same.
I don't think babies are born as Athiests.
I think it would explain why just about every remote tribe has a religion of some sort, even if they are so remote they don't have much contact with the outside world.
-
No, they do not believe in a God until someone tells them about a God. How could they?
Therefore they are atheists.
You have three people here who remember being a baby.
Floo also remembers being a baby, although she had a religious background around her, I wonder what she remembers?
If babies were born atheists you would have at least a few remote tribes who had no religion, why would they?
But there is usually a belief of some sort.
If a number of babies are born with this feeling inside them, it would explain why remote tribes form a religion.
After all, a remote tribe that can't read and doesn't have much contact with their neighbours can't just hear about it.
Some of them would have set up a society without a religion of some sort.
But they normally do have one.
It would explain why they do.
( without getting into what is true, and what isn't )
-
Yes, an awareness of God comes first, religion later - or not. Religion can actually be off putting and young children are confused if they see grown ups, who adhere to a religion, saying things as if, and not behaving as though, they have God within them. (Having said all that, parents often can't win :D.)
-
Untrue, like Brownie, I believed and sensed God being around without being told.
Can a baby in infancy really believe or disbelief as to make sense of God in the world of adulthood?
That's why people say babies are atheist - meaning they have no belief in God.
-
That's why people say babies are atheist - meaning they have no belief in God.
Perhaps they could be called gnostic in the sense that they know the divine but are incapable of expressing it in theistic terms. Once theism kicks in they lose gnosis and 'unless you become as a little child again'.... etc.
-
That's why people say babies are atheist - meaning they have no belief in God.
Maeght, do you have evidence in support of this claim? The problem is that I'm not sure that anyone knows how a baby's brain works at this level. As ekim suggests, agnostic would probably be more realistic unless you are also willing to suggest that a baby is equally ascience - in the 'knowledge' sense of the word science.
-
As ekim suggests, agnostic would probably be more realistic
I said the opposite i.e. they 'know' (gnostic) but don't have the mental capacity to theistically conceptualise it.
-
To return to the thread title; I pray for much the same reason that I used to speak with my parents before they died - not to mention the reason why I speak with my siblings and other relatives and friends.
So, yes, sometimes I talk with God as an equal - John White in his book 'Partners in Prayer' describes prayer as taking part in a 'celestial board meeting', where each board member has equal influence. Sometimes, I talk with a degree of respect, as I would have done with my parents or older friends who have greater experience in various issues than I do. On other occasions, prayer is time of sheer fun - again, as is the case with conversations with frinds and family - and yes, occasionally prayer is venting my frustrations with God, with friends and family and with whatever negative circumstance I might be in at the time - currently, that is the time I am taking to recover from my ill-health thro' 2015.
-
I said the opposite i.e. they 'know' (gnostic) but don't have the mental capacity to theistically conceptualise it.
Sorry, ekim - just reread your post. I misrepresented you. However, I stll believe that agnostic would be better, because I'm not sure that being able (or otherwise) to conceptualise something is necessariy the right marker.
-
Sorry, ekim - just reread your post. I misrepresented you. However, I stll believe that agnostic would be better, because I'm not sure that being able (or otherwise) to conceptualise something is necessariy the right marker.
Agnostic is not some half way house.
All babies are atheists at birth.
This is just a fact and not up for debate.
There are any number of things they do not yet believe (how could they!).
They do not believe the Earth is round, they do not believe the Earth is flat. They know nothing about the Earth to have belief at all!
-
Agnostic is not some half way house.
Precisely, which is why I believe that infants are agnostic, not atheist. They simply don't know. Atheism is an action, in the same way that theism is.
-
Precisely, which is why I believe that infants are agnostic, not atheist. They simply don't know. Atheism is an action, in the same way that theism is.
That's NOT precisely!
Because they do not KNOW about anything they also cannot BELIEVE it!
You have to know about something first!
It is a simple trivial fact they they BOTH do not know about stuff, and therefore do not BELIEVE stuff.
-
That's NOT precisely!
Because they do not KNOW about anything they also cannot BELIEVE it!
You have to know about something first!
It is a simple trivial fact they they BOTH do not know about stuff, and therefore do not BELIEVE stuff.
Agrred, and I'd put the 'don't know' before the 'don't believe' in the process; you seem to be putting the 'don't believe' first. I'd say that not having knowledge trumps not believing.
-
Agrred, and I'd put the 'don't know' before the 'don't believe' in the process; you seem to be putting the 'don't believe' first. I'd say that not having knowledge trumps not believing.
It's no a case of either/ or. For most descriptions of God I have heard I am an Agnostic Atheist. In the case of the God of YEC then I am just an Atheist.
Anyway any chance of you answering the outstanding question on the other thread?
-
Sorry, ekim - just reread your post. I misrepresented you. However, I stll believe that agnostic would be better, because I'm not sure that being able (or otherwise) to conceptualise something is necessariy the right marker.
I agree that theistic concepts are not an advantage and yet religious literature is full of them, like God, Heaven, soul. I was also linking what I said to Brownie's experience in her post 'Yes, an awareness of God comes first, religion later - or not.' Even then it appears that she is looking back and giving a childhood experience a theological name.
-
Agrred, and I'd put the 'don't know' before the 'don't believe' in the process; you seem to be putting the 'don't believe' first. I'd say that not having knowledge trumps not believing.
They are both equal.
You seem to want to avoid the fact that babies do not believe stuff at birth.
-
Precisely, which is why I believe that infants are agnostic, not atheist. They simply don't know. Atheism is an action, in the same way that theism is.
What is the 'action' of atheism?
-
They are both equal.
You seem to want to avoid the fact that babies do not believe stuff at birth.
I think he is using agnostic as a half way house between atheist and theist. He wants to put them in neither camp.
-
Most atheists are agnostic atheists, aren't they? Certainly the ones I chat to, are. There are gnostic atheists, that is, a 7 on Dawkins' scale, but I don't see all that many of them around.
I think using 'atheist' about a baby is odd, since atheism suggests (to me) that one has thought about it and considered different views. Obviously, a baby hasn't done that, but technically babies are atheists, that is, lacking a belief in God.
-
yes I am an agnostic atheist, except where very specific claims about God are made such as from some YECs. Then I would go further along the Dawkins scale almost all the way to strong atheism and say that that particular God does not exist.
-
Precisely, which is why I believe that infants are agnostic
Agnosticism is the belief that it is impossible to know if there is a god. How can an infant hold that belief if it has not yet developed a coherent idea of what God is? Or knowledge?
They simply don't know.
That's not the definition of agnosticism. If it were, we would all be classed as agnostics, since none of us know if there is a god or not.
Atheism is an action, in the same way that theism is.
Wrong and you should know why, given you have been told so many times the past.
-
That's not the definition of agnosticism. If it were, we would all be classed as agnostics, since none of us know if there is a god or not.
See Alan Burns for a contrary opinion.
-
See Alan Burns for a contrary opinion.
Alan Burns has a strong conviction that there is a god, but he doesn't know it.
-
Alan Burns has a strong conviction that there is a god, but he doesn't know it.
Indeed. That doesn't stop him from making precisely that claim, though.
-
Indeed. That doesn't stop him from making precisely that claim, though.
What he claims he knows is of no consequence to Hope's definition of agnosticism. His claim is that people who don't know God exists are agnostics. We both know that is an erroneous definition and it makes everybody an agnostic.No amount of claiming you know something makes it true that you do know the thing.
-
Alan Burns has a strong conviction that there is a god, but he doesn't know it.
He believes it, he made a choice to believe it after being prompted to do so, whether by the Lord or by his unconscious.
Before anyone says that to make a decision like the one Alan made makes one impervious to any negatives, that is not true. If one is of a constantly enquiring mind, that doesn't stop. Also, according to Christian teaching (which non-Christians will not acknowledge), an area in which all negatives are 'swept out' - my paraphrase - will soon be invaded with doubts and fears. We are human beings!
-
Maeght, do you have evidence in support of this claim? The problem is that I'm not sure that anyone knows how a baby's brain works at this level. As ekim suggests, agnostic would probably be more realistic unless you are also willing to suggest that a baby is equally ascience - in the 'knowledge' sense of the word science.
Hope - what claim did I make exactly? I was pointing out that wjhat Sassy said supports the arguments of people who say babies are atheist. I didn't say if I was one of those people or not.
-
Maeght, do you have evidence in support of this claim? The problem is that I'm not sure that anyone knows how a baby's brain works at this level. As ekim suggests, agnostic would probably be more realistic unless you are also willing to suggest that a baby is equally ascience - in the 'knowledge' sense of the word science.
As has been said, being agnostic isn't just not having knowledge but is a position taken about whether it is possible to have that knowledge, and I don't think babies have been able to determine that or not, do you?
-
I think he is using agnostic as a half way house between atheist and theist. He wants to put them in neither camp.
Also using atheist as a belief that there is no God rather than a lack of belief in God.
-
Also using atheist as a belief that there is no God rather than a lack of belief in God.
Yes, you are probably right.
-
Alan Burns has a strong conviction that there is a god, but he doesn't know it.
Can you prove that?
How by your opinion would he know there was a God?
In the light of faith and Christ's teachings explain why he doesn't know.
Christ said:
"23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."
Now we see that Christ and God the Father dwell with the believer who keeps the words of Christ.
Prove what Christ said to be false for Alan. Or at least have the decency to admit (since you claim open mindedness) that Alan might indeed know there is a God.
-
Anyone who claims god exists as a fact is a liar as there is no evidence to substantiate the claim! Of course it is just remotely possible it could exist, which begs the question why is it playing silly beggars with humanity?
-
Anyone who claims god exists as a fact is a liar as there is no evidence to substantiate the claim! Of course it is just remotely possible it could exist, which begs the question why is it playing silly beggars with humanity?
People healed. Prayers answered. Jesus Christ rising from the dead. The things foretold in the bible happening.
The Jews came back to Israel.
King James Bible
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
We are definitely in the time of increase travel and knowledge.
Anyone like yourself, who ingnores the truth to make such untrue claims are fooling no one but themselves.
The truth is that without actually looking for any evidence you speak things you cannot even prove to yourself.
-
People healed. Prayers answered. Jesus Christ rising from the dead. The things foretold in the bible happening.
The Jews came back to Israel.
King James Bible
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
We are definitely in the time of increase travel and knowledge.
Anyone like yourself, who ingnores the truth to make such untrue claims are fooling no one but themselves.
The truth is that without actually looking for any evidence you speak things you cannot even prove to yourself.
There is NO proof, you certainly can't prove any of your statements to be true.
-
There is NO proof, you certainly can't prove any of your statements to be true.
So they were flying from all over the world to other countries in the time of Daniel?
And we have not had a massive increase in knowledge the last two centuries or so which has enabled all the modern changes for better living conditions. You really do make yourself look stupid sometimes, Floo.
The fact is what is written in Daniel is evident now. Just as he was told....
-
So they were flying from all over the world to other countries in the time of Daniel?
And we have not had a massive increase in knowledge the last two centuries or so which has enabled all the modern changes for better living conditions. You really do make yourself look stupid sometimes, Floo.
The fact is what is written in Daniel is evident now. Just as he was told....
Does anyone understand this bit of Sass nonsense?
-
Does anyone understand this bit of Sass nonsense?
I think she is saying that there are events foretold in Daniel which are now coming true and things in there which couldn't be known without divine knowledge. Not really true of course but to a believer it probably appears that way.
-
I think she is saying that there are events foretold in Daniel which are now coming true and things in there which couldn't be known without divine knowledge. Not really true of course but to a believer it probably appears that way.
Hmmmmmm!
-
Hmmmmmm!
Some of us only come up to the edge Floo, if you're with me.
ippy
-
Some of us only come up to the edge Floo, if you're with me.
ippy
I'm not.
-
Anyone who claims god exists as a fact is a liar as there is no evidence to substantiate the claim! Of course it is just remotely possible it could exist, which begs the question why is it playing silly beggars with humanity?
Calling people liars is very strong floo. Many of us believe that God exists, we can't prove it but we are quite certain about it. You have known people who are the same, would you call them liars? In order to lie you have to be deliberate about it.
PS: I wish you'd revisit the 'praying to saints' thread. You started it, it's on its second page so it must be worth a visit from the author.
-
Calling people liars is very strong floo. Many of us believe that God exists, we can't prove it but we are quite certain about it. You have known people who are the same, would you call them liars? In order to lie you have to be deliberate about it.
PS: I wish you'd revisit the 'praying to saints' thread. You started it, it's on its second page so it must be worth a visit from the author.
Agreed. They're not lying as they believe it to be true and see what they consider to be evidence to support that belief.
-
Thanks Maeght.
-
If they state that god exists as a FACT it is a lie, imo, because is not a fact only a mere belief.
-
Alright then, I am a liar by your definition floo. In the days when you believed God existed, you were a liar, so were your friends and family.
-
If they state that god exists as a FACT it is a lie, imo, because is not a fact only a mere belief.
But they believe it to be a fact and therefore are not lying, which entails deliberate misrepresentation.
-
Calling people liars is very strong floo. Many of us believe that God exists, we can't prove it but we are quite certain about it. You have known people who are the same, would you call them liars? In order to lie you have to be deliberate about it.
PS: I wish you'd revisit the 'praying to saints' thread. You started it, it's on its second page so it must be worth a visit from the author.
Deluded would be about the right word, liar isn't really fair imo
ippy
-
Dear ippy,
Deluded, believing in something which is false, nope, I believe in something which is true ( for me ) so not deluded ;)
Gonnagle.
-
Dear ippy,
Deluded, believing in something which is false, nope, I believe in something which is true ( for me ) so not deluded ;)
Gonnagle.
Gonners, you nor anyone else can possibly know whether there is any truth in your religious stuff, especially the magical, mythical and the superstition based parts thereof, which is very unlikely to have any truth in it, therefore delusional, unless of course?
Hope can help you with the evidence, well he thinks he can?
ippy
-
Dear ippy,
Deluded, believing in something which is false, nope, I believe in something which is true ( for me ) so not deluded ;)
Gonnagle.
The existence of a god or gods is either true or false. It is not a true for you type thing.
-
The existence of a god or gods is either true or false. It is not a true for you type thing.
It is true to say that believing or disbelieving in God is a fact.
His existence is only known by those who have faith and meet him.
-
All...
All the truth is out there we just have to reason it out correctly...and believe truth when we are told truth, and disbelieve lies as soon as they become obvious as lies. If we did then scammers would find it much harder to weave their delusions around us...we wouldn't be taken in by the profiteers who paint delusions to sell their merchandise and we wouldn't believe the reasoners who openly say that they will crush Jesus' teaching even without knowing his teaching or even owning a Holy Bible.
But the point here is why do believers pray...we do this because Jesus showed us how to pray and we like to do what he tells us. We then find that a righteous strength is being added to our own being. An added dimension enters our lives and we become much more confident because we find it easier to dismiss all the tripe that is thrown at us all...believers and non-believers.
If we analyse things we can say we are being filled emotionally by a nourishment that reaches deep within us...and a clever scientist could put clever reasoning to it...but for my money, we, by adopting meekness and righteous truth as our guidence-tool are being filled with God's living water...an invisible quencher of hard to reach thirsts.
-
All...
All the truth is out there we just have to reason it out correctly...and believe truth when we are told truth, and disbelieve lies as soon as they become obvious as lies.
That is why evidence based critical reasoning is valuable. In earlier times people would more likely just accept what they were told on faith, or by authority, because it says so in the Bible/Qu'ran etc. Now we are getting better at asking does this stand up to scrutiny and dismissing beliefs that don't.
-
That is why evidence based critical reasoning is valuable. In earlier times people would more likely just accept what they were told on faith, or by authority, because it says so in the Bible/Qu'ran etc. Now we are getting better at asking does this stand up to scrutiny and dismissing beliefs that don't.
I afraid there is evidence that people on this board do not want to contemplate the universes nature which is beyond science. This is dogmatic agnosticism and nor critical reasoning.
Either you are peek of CR ;)or the worst kind of Dogmatic agnostic safely occupied on this board where your refusal to see the naturalists predicament is contained.
-
I afraid there is evidence that people on this board do not want to contemplate the universes nature which is beyond science. This is dogmatic agnosticism and nor critical reasoning.
Either you are peek of CR ;)or the worst kind of Dogmatic agnostic safely occupied on this board where your refusal to see the naturalists predicament is contained.
1- Explain how the universe can have a nature' and what it is.
2 - When you have done this, explaine exactly what you mean by 'beyond science'.
-
I afraid there is evidence that people on this board do not want to contemplate the universes nature which is beyond science. This is dogmatic agnosticism and nor critical reasoning.
Either you are peek of CR ;)or the worst kind of Dogmatic agnostic safely occupied on this board where your refusal to see the naturalists predicament is contained.
eerm, what is peek of CR ?
Also not sure what could be meant by 'beyond science'. Science broadly means 'knowledge', and more specifically refers to knowledge gained through empirical means. How could we know anything beyond the bounds of knowledge. We could speculate but speculation is not knowledge.
-
1- Explain how the universe can have a nature' and what it is.
2 - When you have done this, explaine exactly what you mean by 'beyond science'.
1: Is it self created, is it eternally uncreated and self moved or is it created. Those are our only options......These are the only natures (ways of being) of the universe possible.
2. Science could never probe the eternal. It could never observe nor recreate the nothing out of which a universe could have popped.
I'm afraid agnosticism in these circumstances beyond not knowing which of the above options for the way the universe is, is an act of faith, a clinging to an unfulfillable faith that by some miraculous process science will answer in favour of scientism and naturalism.
-
1: Is it self created, is it eternally uncreated and self moved or is it created. Those are our only options......These are the only natures (ways of being) of the universe possible.
There's at least a fourth way.
Have you not been following Nick's wonderful lectures on the science of Jesus?
If you had then you would know that the universe was formed when gigantic clouds of galactic size of God's swirly twirly dynamic electrical energy crashed together.
Don't say that Nick is wrong, it would be a crushing blow for God's wonderful science.
Is Nick wrong Vlad?
Don't be shy now.
-
There's at least a fourth way.
Have you not been following Nick's wonderful lectures on the science of Jesus?
If you had then you would know that the universe was formed when gigantic clouds of galactic size of God's swirly twirly dynamic electrical energy crashed together.
Don't say that Nick is wrong, it would be a crushing blow for God's wonderful science.
Is Nick wrong Vlad?
Don't be shy now.
Nicks view is the universe was created so he follows and has committed to that.
As for the mechanics?......swirly is acceptable but I would not go so far as twirly.Have you interpolated a degree of freedom there Seb?
-
1: Is it self created, is it eternally uncreated and self moved or is it created. Those are our only options......These are the only natures (ways of being) of the universe possible.
2. Science could never probe the eternal. It could never observe nor recreate the nothing out of which a universe could have popped.
I'm afraid agnosticism in these circumstances beyond not knowing which of the above options for the way the universe is, is an act of faith, a clinging to an unfulfillable faith that by some miraculous process science will answer in favour of scientism and naturalism.
I asked you two straightforward questions. I find your response incomprehensible!
-
That is why evidence based critical reasoning is valuable. In earlier times people would more likely just accept what they were told on faith, or by authority, because it says so in the Bible/Qu'ran etc. Now we are getting better at asking does this stand up to scrutiny and dismissing beliefs that don't.
I'm not condemning science though many of its scientists are questionable...I am questioning your combined abilities here, to put those facts and data points together and realise the scientific advantages of praying to God in the way Jesus taught us.
It seems to me that the Catholic confession, the Freudian psyco-analysis techniques, the Samaratans, all scientifically prove the value of prayer...especially when Biblical answers like forgiveness and turning the other cheek offer the best solution to many of our most distressing problems.
-
I'm not condemning science though many of its scientists are questionable...I am questioning your combined abilities to here, to put those facts and data points together and realise the scientific advantages of praying to God in the way Jesus taught us.
It seems to me that the Catholic confession, the Freudian psyco-analysis techniques, the Samaratans, all scientifically prove the value of prayer...
If it is as proved as you claim then why don't the Samaritans tell their callers to use it? It being scientific and everything.
Seems a bit tragic to me. A bit like a doctor withholding treatment that he knows will work.
What do you think Nick?
-
If it is as proved as you claim then why don't the Samaritans tell their callers to use it? It being scientific and everything.
Seems a bit tragic to me. A bit like a doctor withholding treatment that he knows will work.
What do you think Nick?
Because the Samaritans have their own skillful way of dealing with these issues...but, as you say, the thirst within these distressed people would be best quenched by a little human compassion that is offered by prayer...but the brain-washing of the many different religions, different cultures, and different atheist beliefs make that all very difficult. That is why, perhaps, Jesus only offers help to those who go to him...directly.
-
I'm not condemning science though many of its scientists are questionable...I am questioning your combined abilities here, to put those facts and data points together and realise the scientific advantages of praying to God in the way Jesus taught us.
If you want to be truly scientific about it you would need to avoid such things as prayer. If at all possible, take humans out of the loop a;together and set up equipment to test theory - machines don't come loaded with emotional baggage and prejudices as do humans
-
If you want to be truly scientific about it you would need to avoid such things as prayer. If at all possible, take humans out of the loop a;together and set up equipment to test theory - machines don't come loaded with emotional baggage and prejudices as do humans
The first thing we need to realise here is that Jesus Christ was not from this world. He was from another very advanced world...and so he was working from a very advanced world's knowledge base. Do you see how foolish you all are for not taking him seriously.
Prayer then is already an established method of communication on this world...Heaven..and obviously has scientific advantages...proven by Sigmund Freud...what more scientific answers do you need...unless you are just trying to muddy the waters.
-
You have to hand it to NM, his unique interpretation of the Bible has livened up the forum since his return. :) It was languishing in the doldrums, before he spiced it up.
-
That is why, perhaps, Jesus only offers help to those who go to him...directly.
Then why don't the Samaritans tell their callers to go to him...directly?
What do you think Nick?
-
Not everyone who calls The Samaritans will believe in Jesus, Seb, and the Samaritans themselves have to be neutral when it comes to religion.
A person with religious beliefs who is in difficulties will ask God for help and guidance, then may feel moved to consult someone whom they hadn't previously thought of. We'd have to ask them. I've not known any praying Christian person who doesn't call on a doctor, a plumber, the bank (possibly), maybe even a solicitor, if they need to. It's common sense.
-
I think ST was being facetious Brownie.
-
I'm not condemning science though many of its scientists are questionable...I am questioning your combined abilities here, to put those facts and data points together and realise the scientific advantages of praying to God in the way Jesus taught us.
It seems to me that the Catholic confession, the Freudian psyco-analysis techniques, the Samaratans, all scientifically prove the value of prayer...especially when Biblical answers like forgiveness and turning the other cheek offer the best solution to many of our most distressing problems.
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals.
-
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals.
Why, do atheists count as Christians,Muslims, and why go to the believer?
I think you need to think that last statement through. :)
-
I think ST was being facetious Brownie.
Not really floo though he may have been rolling his eyes when he typed it :D.
It's not uncommon to ask why we do not petition God directly, or why we need to involve other agencies. Indeed, there are some who don't go to anyone for help except God! We've sometimes discussed them here, for example, those who don't avail themselves of medicine. However people have a big role to play with different expertise. We help eachother. Can you imagine going to the doctor and being told, "You don't need me! Just go home and pray"? (Bank manager might say that of course and would be saying it tongue in cheek.)
-
The first thing we need to realise here is that Jesus Christ was not from this world. He was from another very advanced world...and so he was working from a very advanced world's knowledge base. Do you see how foolish you all are for not taking him seriously.
Prayer then is already an established method of communication on this world...Heaven..and obviously has scientific advantages...proven by Sigmund Freud...what more scientific answers do you need...unless you are just trying to muddy the waters.
The answers you supply aren't scientific at all Nick. I don't think you even know what the word means.
-
Why, do atheists count as Christians,Muslims, and why go to the believer?
I think you need to think that last statement through. :)
I really don't know what you're on about here.
Here's my post again....
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals.
Now then, let's look at this:
When people are really ill with a life-threatening condition, where do ambulances take them?
Think about it...
Yes, that's right.
Ambulances take them to hospitals.
Well done!
Would you rather ambulances didn't go to hospitals and instead took people to places where they could be prayed over?
Now, please read my post again and tell me what the problem is.
-
I really don't know what you're on about here.
Here's my post again....
Now then, let's look at this:
When people are really ill with a life-threatening condition, where do ambulances take them?
Think about it...
Yes, that's right.
Ambulances take them to hospitals.
Well done!
Would you rather ambulances didn't go to hospitals and instead took people to places where they could be prayed over?
Now, please read my post again and tell me what the problem is.
No You realised you made a cock-up and tried to cover.
So let us make this clear. As an atheist who is seriously ill which do you want the ambulance to take to...the churche, mosque, temple, etc, instead of the hospital?
Your post was not rational, reasonable and made absolutely no sense when related to an atheist. Because the fact is, prayer works but you don't believe in it.
Hence why should it work for you when you are sick and don't believe.
I feel you understand now. No point in a reply because you never thought it out in the first instance. ???
-
No You realised you made a cock-up and tried to cover.
So let us make this clear. As an atheist who is seriously ill which do you want the ambulance to take to...the churche, mosque, temple, etc, instead of the hospital?
Your post was not rational, reasonable and made absolutely no sense when related to an atheist. Because the fact is, prayer works but you don't believe in it.
Hence why should it work for you when you are sick and don't believe.
I feel you understand now. No point in a reply because you never thought it out in the first instance. ???
Where did the original post specifically mention atheists?
I'll give you a cue - it didn't.
You introduced the atheist angle, nobody else did.
Looks like you made a cock up and tried, rather unsuccessfully, to cover.
It was perfectly clear to any rational thinking human being what Khatru was referring to.
But I suppose that as you do not fall into that category then you might be excused!
No need to respond, to save yourself further embarrassment.
-
No You realised you made a cock-up and tried to cover.
So let us make this clear. As an atheist who is seriously ill which do you want the ambulance to take to...the churche, mosque, temple, etc, instead of the hospital?
Your post was not rational, reasonable and made absolutely no sense when related to an atheist. Because the fact is, prayer works but you don't believe in it.
Hence why should it work for you when you are sick and don't believe.
I feel you understand now. No point in a reply because you never thought it out in the first instance. ???
Sass, it isn't Khatru who has cocked up!
-
Where did the original post specifically mention atheists?
I'll give you a cue - it didn't.
You introduced the atheist angle, nobody else did.
Looks like you made a cock up and tried, rather unsuccessfully, to cover.
It was perfectly clear to any rational thinking human being what Khatru was referring to.
But I suppose that as you do not fall into that category then you might be excused!
No need to respond, to save yourself further embarrassment.
Are you really willing to make yourself look as you do to argue something you know will make your remark look silly?
Here goes -What was actually said:-
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals.
You see he referred to AMBULANCES are you saying Atheists, Christians, Muslims and everyone doesn't use ambulances?
Or that only the religious use them. I think you need to think before you answer in support of someone who didn't get there own post or understand the implications of it, as you just repeated the same error.
He didn't mention any atheists, Christians, muslins etc. He included all by saying AMBULANCES.
Unless you want to state no human beings use ambulances. ??? :o
-
Stop digging an even deeper hole for yourself Sass, I think all but you got completely what Khatru was talking about.
-
No You realised you made a cock-up and tried to cover.
So let us make this clear. As an atheist who is seriously ill which do you want the ambulance to take to...the churche, mosque, temple, etc, instead of the hospital?
Your post was not rational, reasonable and made absolutely no sense when related to an atheist. Because the fact is, prayer works but you don't believe in it.
Hence why should it work for you when you are sick and don't believe.
I feel you understand now. No point in a reply because you never thought it out in the first instance. ???
Sass, please pay attention.
My post was quite rational and easy to understand.
Well, that's what I thought.
I'll make the same statement again. Please read it carefully and try not to substitute it with a statement of your own.
Ready?
Here goes....
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals.
Right. Have you read my statement?
Now, forget about whether the sick person is religious or not, it makes no difference.
If prayer worked an ambulance could take a dangerously ill person to a place of prayer (church, mosque, temple, etc). Once there, they could be prayed over by believers. Then that person would be cured.
Of course we all know that prayer doesn't work because ambulances still take people to hospitals for medical treatment.
-
Sass, please pay attention.
My post was quite rational and easy to understand.
Well, that's what I thought.
I'll make the same statement again. Please read it carefully and try not to substitute it with a statement of your own.
Ready?
Here goes....
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals.
Right. Have you read my statement?
Now, forget about whether the sick person is religious or not, it makes no difference.
If prayer worked an ambulance could take a dangerously ill person to a place of prayer (church, mosque, temple, etc). Once there, they could be prayed over by believers. Then that person would be cured.
Of course we all know that prayer doesn't work because ambulances still take people to hospitals for medical treatment.
You made yourself quite clear, I think Sass misread your post.
-
You made yourself quite clear, I think Sass misread your post.
Thanks!
I don't think Sass grasped the point I was making.
-
Thanks!
I don't think Sass grasped the point I was making.
But as the rest of us did, don't worry about it. :)
-
Are you really willing to make yourself look as you do to argue something you know will make your remark look silly?
Here goes -What was actually said:-
You see he referred to AMBULANCES are you saying Atheists, Christians, Muslims and everyone doesn't use ambulances?
Or that only the religious use them. I think you need to think before you answer in support of someone who didn't get there own post or understand the implications of it, as you just repeated the same error.
He didn't mention any atheists, Christians, muslins etc. He included all by saying AMBULANCES.
Unless you want to state no human beings use ambulances. ??? :o
Not only have you got the wrong end of the stick, you have got the wrong stick.
In fact what you have is likely not even to be a stick!
You are just embarrassing yourself now. Please stop for your own sake.
Read the next few posts after your reply to mine and try not to make things worse with your obsession with having to be right all of the time.
-
You made yourself quite clear, I think Sass misread your post.
Your powers of observation have not waned!
-
Of course, if prayer truly worked, then the sheer number of people whose lives were saved by intercessory prayers would convince even the staunchest atheist that there may be a god, or indeed, gods.
-
Sass, please pay attention.
KHATRU PAY ATTENTION.
Sassy
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 9885
View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Why do Christians pray to their god?
« Reply #205 on: October 04, 2016, 01:50:28 AM »
Quote from: Khatru on October 03, 2016, 09:44:30 PM
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals.
Why, do atheists count as Christians,Muslims, and why go to the believer?
I think you need to think that last statement through. :)
The painstakingly obvious is that people relying on prayers don't call ambulances.
You don't need to take a sick person to any where to pray for them.
ATHEISTS do not believe so why take them in an ambulance to church.
Your statement made NO LOGICAL SENSE in the great scheme of things.
Atheists would never ask for prayer and would expect their ambulance to go to hospital.
Prayer does work but why would an ambulance be called and why would they take them to church?
And what church would you take an atheist to.
YOU started it! But you certainly never had the logic to follow through.
-
Of course, if prayer truly worked, then the sheer number of people whose lives were saved by intercessory prayers would convince even the staunchest atheist that there may be a god, or indeed, gods.
True!
-
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals
Let's have a look at what you've said....
The painstakingly obvious is that people relying on prayers don't call ambulances.
Do you rely on prayer? If your nearest and dearest were to keel over with a heart attack or stroke, would you choose not to call an ambulance and opt for prayer instead?
Sadly, the list of dead believers that eschewed medical assistance for prayer isn't getting any smaller. A sure sign that prayer doesn't work.
You don't need to take a sick person to any where to pray for them.
True but as per my original post, neither does it matter whether that person is an atheist. If that person was in terrible pain or so seriously ill that death was likely, it would be prudent to go to a church, mosque, temple, etc so that person could get immediate prayer and be healed. Well, it would be if prayer worked.
ATHEISTS do not believe so why take them in an ambulance to church.
Whether they believe or not, does it matter when your prayers could save their lives? You claim that prayer works but you would withhold that prayer on the basis that someone doesn't believe? That doesn't sound very Christian at all.
Also bear in mind that prayer works for other religions too, so it doesn't have to be a church.
Your statement made NO LOGICAL SENSE in the great scheme of things.
It makes perfectly good sense as shown by those who understood exactly what I was saying. "The great scheme of things? What would that be?
Atheists would never ask for prayer and would expect their ambulance to go to hospital.
That's right and that's exactly what happens. Why? Because prayer doesn't work. If it did work then there would be no atheists and the NHS could get by on a minimal budget. Pleas see my original post, oh, here it is again:
If prayer truly worked, ambulances would go to churches, mosques, temples, etc, instead of hospitals
Prayer does work but why would an ambulance be called and why would they take them to church?
Because if prayer works then why risk invasive and painful surgery? Why risk infection? Why risk prescribing drugs which may or may not work? All this could be avoided if prayer worked.
And what church would you take an atheist to.
As I said, it doesn't matter whether the person believes or not, the issue at hand is to prevent pain and death by curing that person. Whether it's a church, temple, mosque, etc, it matters not, just take them to whatever place of worship is nearest where they can be cured by prayer.
YOU started it! But you certainly never had the logic to follow through.
Actually, I do.
-
No! Khatru,
Why do you want to try and riddle out of the fact you got it all wrong?
Why not just admit you could not think of it, to include the actual power of prayer
or what the bible teaches about it.
You see believers do not have to go anywhere.
Prayers/Petitions can be said/made anywhere.
God is everywhere... in all places at all times.
You are limited by your own understanding and lack of knowledge.
But believers are not limited nor are the imprisoned by the world and it's ways.
Our God hears us wherever we are...
7 Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.
9 If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
10 Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.
To pray for healing requires NO ambulance journey, no temple or Church.
It requires only a prayer to the God who is right there where we are.
And as I said ATHEISTS need their ambulance because they would not go to a Church or ask or believe in prayer.
You spoke in haste from the purely human side of your understanding. That is what you do but to try and fit it in with the Christian understanding is impossible. Light and Darkness do not mix they exist individually but never in the same place.
-
God needs a new battery in its hearing aid as it seems deaf to many prayers!
-
No! Khatru,
Why do you want to try and riddle out of the fact you got it all wrong?
Why not just admit you could not think of it, to include the actual power of prayer
or what the bible teaches about it.
You see believers do not have to go anywhere.
Prayers/Petitions can be said/made anywhere.
God is everywhere... in all places at all times.
You are limited by your own understanding and lack of knowledge.
But believers are not limited nor are the imprisoned by the world and it's ways.
Our God hears us wherever we are...
To pray for healing requires NO ambulance journey, no temple or Church.
It requires only a prayer to the God who is right there where we are.
And as I said ATHEISTS need their ambulance because they would not go to a Church or ask or believe in prayer.
You spoke in haste from the purely human side of your understanding. That is what you do but to try and fit it in with the Christian understanding is impossible. Light and Darkness do not mix they exist individually but never in the same place.
I get it, Sass
You ignore points I made and refuse to answer the specific questions I asked.
I've said this before with you and I'll say it again.
Your failure to refute me is noted - I accept it as your tacit acceptance that prayer does not work.
-
I've just re-read the thread, albeit fairly quickly, and would like to ask Khatru why he talks or talked to his father, or to his friends - or even to his line manager.
-
Sass just like Hope I've had a quick read and though; wouldn't it make the most sense to get some kind of emergency aid, like call an ambulance, see a doctor, try to do something yourself to help if there's no one about but you must face reality and do the more sensible things first if anyone needs some form of medical aid and then after you've done that lot, feel free to pray as much as you like Sass
You could also sacrifice a lamb, stand on one leg for 24 hours, spend time quoting Proust, all of these things added together are just a likely to assist the person in trouble equally as much as you think prayer would.
ippy
-
Prayer doesn't require any particular posture. It doesn't even need the eyes closed. There's no reason why Sass or anyone else shouldn't be able to pray, should they wish to, when walking, or driving, or doing the dishes. I find prayer very useful when I'm in certain drivers' passenger seats.
-
I've just re-read the thread, albeit fairly quickly, and would like to ask Khatru why he talks or talked to his father, or to his friends - or even to his line manager.
Probably for 1001 different reasons, none of which included a request from me for the laws of physics to be suspended.