WHAT makes a person saved in Christ Jesus?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad the Vulgarian,

The part which says it isn't a shit analogy.

Ah, I see - a standard Vlad, "I don't like this but I can't argue against it so I'll just throw an unqualified insult at it and hope no-one notices" response

Fair enough.

As far as I understand Xanadu is a UNESCO world heritage site ( Like the last decent post you composed ) and Atlantis has yet to be, if ever, located.

Way to miss the point.

Again.

See, here's the thing: you can attach any characteristics to any personal belief you like: challenging you, curing the lame, fluttering around on wings, wish-fulfilling, whatever, to your heart's content. What you cannot do though is wave your hands and suddenly claim those characteristics that happen to suit you have anything whatever to say to the arguments you rely on to assert the personal belief to be an objectively true one too.

If you seriously think otherwise, take any one of the hopeless arguments you've attempted here ("I intuit it" for example) that actually "work" for anything at all - gods and fairies alike - and then explain how you would propose to retro-fit the characteristics you happen to like to the arguments that got you to the belief in the first place.

And when this piece of Vladdish dullardry finally dawns on you, perhaps you'd be so good as finally to attempt an argument for your objectively true god that does not work just as well for my objectively true fairies.

Ta.   

 

Hillside I don't think I have ever said I can prove God or provide evidence that would satisfy an old philosophical materialist like yersel'
However as I keep saying neither can ye yersel' provide that kind of evidence for philosophical materialism itself.

I'm talking about standard definitions of PM of course not the implied notion of yours that unless you are on the inside you can't really understand what philosophical materialism is. That is mystical and certainly not appropriate in the type of ''front'' you wish to put up.

Until philosophical materialism is established then I am afraid that even for you God may be true.

As a believer no who wasn't a believer before, my experience would lead me to tell you that the only way to miss God is to be running in the other direction from him.

I am not here to win some kind of argument with you proving God. It is up to him to reveal himself to you and for you to make response.

[torridon]

Be careful you know he is a little boy posting in an adult world. His speciality is winding people up by talking rubbish about subjects he knows nothing about.

Hehe, that's rich from someone who still believes the Moon landings were faked. You are a hoot Sass.

Is that all you have.

Well your a dead hoot....aren't you.

Aw, come on give us a kiss Sass

[ippy]

I asked that because it is clear from some of the things thrown out on this forum that some believers have changed the truth and substituted others.

As the bible warns against putting burdens on others I thought I would ask
what the believers actually believe saves them.

                                       "WHAT makes a person saved in Christ Jesus"?

                       Nothing, because it's never happened or is it very likely to happen.

                                                              Next question?

ippy

[SusanDoris]

Personally, I'd quite like to read an explanation of what exactly the topic title means!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sassy,

Truth is not an insult. And as for Jesus... you don't know him. Just as you are incapable of establishing any real argument.

You have to copy what people have said about you. I told you that you were unable to bring any arguments and rely on insult and moving goal posts.


Well, if you knew anything about Jesus, you would know what you do leaves no possibility for anyone to be proud of you. Pride has no part in Christianity. But what would you a teenager know about Christianity. You just had your BACKSIDE spanked and your face is as red as you bum.

Ignorance isn't bliss in your case it is the blind falling in your own ditch,.

Of course Sassy, of course. Stay warm this winter, and do be careful around sharp objects won't you.

[Sassy]

Be careful you know he is a little boy posting in an adult world. His speciality is winding people up by talking rubbish about subjects he knows nothing about.

Hehe, that's rich from someone who still believes the Moon landings were faked. You are a hoot Sass.

Is that all you have.

Well your a dead hoot....aren't you.

Aw, come on give us a kiss Sass

Ok... where is the real Torridon?  What have the other members or those at his home done with him...

[Sassy]

I asked that because it is clear from some of the things thrown out on this forum that some believers have changed the truth and substituted others.

As the bible warns against putting burdens on others I thought I would ask
what the believers actually believe saves them.

                                       "WHAT makes a person saved in Christ Jesus"?

                       Nothing, because it's never happened or is it very likely to happen.

                                                              Next question?

ippy

Could you believe that because you cherry pick the things you take in when reading?

As the bible warns against putting burdens on others I thought I would ask
what the believers actually believe saves them.

Yes, Ippy you are free to ask but not qualified to answer.

If you have evidence to support what you say that would be very nice.
But if you haven't wouldn't it be best to learn why others believe then try and disprove the words of Christ.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad the Vulgarian,

Hillside I don't think I have ever said I can prove God…

But you have claimed that “God” is an objective fact, only non-believers in “Him” haven’t had the house call or can’t grasp your knock down reasoning for it. If though you’re now retrenching to where you should have been all along – “God” is a personal faith belief for you rather than an objective fact, no more or less true for the rest of us than any other personal faith belief anyone else may happen to have in anything else (fairies included) then fair enough.

I’ve always said that personal faith beliefs of this kind are no-one’s business but those who happen to hold them. I merely raise a “now hang on a minute” when they overreach by insisting that their truth should be my truth too. Roll back the churches to private members clubs, defenestrate from the classroom clerics teaching their fancies as facts to children, eject bishops from the House of Lords etc though and I’ll find something more productive to discuss – gardening maybe.   

… or provide evidence that would satisfy an old philosophical materialist like yersel'

However as I keep saying neither can ye yersel' provide that kind of evidence for philosophical materialism itself.

I thought you’d stopped saying that now I’ve shown it to be a crock?

(Wearily) I don’t believe your god to be real for exactly the same reason that you don’t think storks to deliver babies. Neither of us need recourse either to the actual or to your re-invented version of PM for our positions – we merely need assess the arguments and evidence to reach our probability-based conclusions. If either of us expects to persuade the other of his belief, then each of us has the burden of proof to show that his belief is more probably true than not – and again PM (either the real one or your misunderstanding of it) has anything to do with that.   

I'm talking about standard definitions of PM of course not the implied notion of yours that unless you are on the inside you can't really understand what philosophical materialism is. That is mystical and certainly not appropriate in the type of ''front'' you wish to put up.

No you’re not talking about the “standard definition” at all, and that’s a complete straw man to boot. Your wrongheaded definition involves people claiming that the material is all there is or could be; the proper definition is that claims of the supernatural offer nothing that can be examined by the tools of materialism or by anything else so the only rational response is to ignore them until a method – any method that’s cogent and coherent – is finally produced to distinguish those claims from white noise.

And no, “I intuit it” doesn’t even get its trousers off for that purpose.

Until philosophical materialism is established then I am afraid that even for you God may be true.

It’s got bugger all to do with PM, and I’ve never said that “God” may not be true – just as you have no argument that fairies or baby-delivering storks may not be true. I know this burden of proof thing has got you foxed, but anything – literally, anything – could be. It’s for the claimant though to explain how they propose to get from “could be” to “more probably is than is not” – something no theist (or fairyist) has ever managed to do.   

As a believer no who wasn't a believer before, my experience would lead me to tell you that the only way to miss God is to be running in the other direction from him.

That’s called the reification fallacy. That you happen to be a “believer” says nothing to whether that belief is correct, and nor therefore to whether there’s anything to run away from.

If you seriously think otherwise, why do you keep running away from my belief in Stan the Stork? 

I am not here to win some kind of argument with you proving God. It is up to him to reveal himself to you and for you to make response.

And having committed the reification fallacy, you do it again. Good effort!

No doubt that’s your personal, entirely subjective belief and you’re welcome to it. I could of course say the same about you for Stan the Stork – but simply assuming our beliefs to be true for each other and then building claims on those assumptions is a pretty fruitless approach I’d have thought.

So, once we’ve cleared away all your brushwood of logical fallacies, false assumptions, misuse of philosophical terms, avoidance of the burden of proof problem and the serried ranks of straw men what you’re left with is an entirely personal faith belief.

And that’s fine and dandy – it’s none of my business after all – but it would serve you well I think finally to grasp that that’s all you have. 

And if you can do that by the way, it will have the notable side-benefit of saving you a fortune in new trousers. 

[Sassy]

Personally, I'd quite like to read an explanation of what exactly the topic title means!

Personally, I'd quite like to read an explanation of what exactly the topic title means!

I guess it's what is "the thing you need to do or believe"  that pleases Jesus and makes him want to keep people for eternity.

🌹

When you were a Christian what did you believe it was, Susan?

I find it interesting that Susan, you believed once but had to ask what if means when asked " What makes a person saved in Christ Jesus."
Rose comes and asks you the question what you believed the answer to be when you professed to be a Christian.


I am interested to know why you had to ask?

[Sassy]

Sassy,

Truth is not an insult. And as for Jesus... you don't know him. Just as you are incapable of establishing any real argument.

You have to copy what people have said about you. I told you that you were unable to bring any arguments and rely on insult and moving goal posts.


Well, if you knew anything about Jesus, you would know what you do leaves no possibility for anyone to be proud of you. Pride has no part in Christianity. But what would you a teenager know about Christianity. You just had your BACKSIDE spanked and your face is as red as you bum.

Ignorance isn't bliss in your case it is the blind falling in your own ditch,.

Of course Sassy, of course. Stay warm this winter, and do be careful around sharp objects won't you.

My son is about your age and I hope I have raised him well enough so he never stoops to such a low condescending attitude as you have. I am sure he won't because he tends only to discuss the things he knows about. He listens and learns about the subjects he doesn't. Who knows... is there any hope for you.
What is amazingly plain is you incapability to admit you know nothing about Christ or Christianity. Yet you engage in discussion to attack and dismiss others who do.
I feel sad for you because you are oblivious to the facts or simply don't care. I am not sure that is a good combination for any young mind.

[SusanDoris]

Personally, I'd quite like to read an explanation of what exactly the topic title means!

I guess it's what is "the thing you need to do or believe"  that pleases Jesus and makes him want to keep people for eternity.

Thank you for your answer.  However, since there is no proof of the person of Jesus in the first place, and since any such person has been dead for about 2,000 years, the idea that one can do or believe something to please him is a non-starter. Ditto for being kept in something called eternity.

When you were a Christian what did you believe it was, Susan?

I don't think the idea came up in saying one's prayers, attending Sunday School etc. I always knew that virgin birth, resurrection, miracles, etc were good stories intended to teach right and wrong behaviour, but the only thing I actually believed was that there was a God. I went along with the Creed etc because that was the way things were - one did not question it, but the question, 'Is this true?' cropped up quite often.

[floo]

Vlad the Vulgarian,

But not as badly as you as your guff about Atlantis and Xanadu demonstrates.

Which part of the analogy is too complicated for you?

The part which says it isn't a shit analogy.

As far as I understand Xanadu is a UNESCO world heritage site ( Like the last decent post you composed ) and Atlantis has yet to be, if ever, located.

Be careful you know he is a little boy posting in an adult world. His speciality is winding people up by talking rubbish about subjects he knows nothing about.

Sass that is funny coming from you, who appears to have higher degrees in spouting nonsense!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sassy,

My son is about your age and I hope I have raised him well enough so he never stoops to such a low condescending attitude as you have. I am sure he won't because he tends only to discuss the things he knows about. He listens and learns about the subjects he doesn't. Who knows... is there any hope for you.
What is amazingly plain is you incapability to admit you know nothing about Christ or Christianity. Yet you engage in discussion to attack and dismiss others who do.
I feel sad for you because you are oblivious to the facts or simply don't care. I am not sure that is a good combination for any young mind.

I really don't know how to engage with you - you seem to be entirely incapable of constructing an argument of any kind, and entirely incapable too of recognising arguments when other people do make them. Instead your posts consist of cut and pasted chunks of bible passages and petty insults, and that's it.

Here for example you accuse me of knowing nothing about Christ etc. I readily accept that you have memorised much more of your "holy" text than I ever have or would want to. That though has nothing whatever to do with discussions about whether there's any reason at all to think that the claims of divinity are actually true.

And that's why by and large I ignore your posts - you have nothing of interest to say because proselytising and insulting offers nothing with which I can engage.

 

[Owlswing]

Sassy,

Truth is not an insult. And as for Jesus... you don't know him. Just as you are incapable of establishing any real argument.

You have to copy what people have said about you. I told you that you were unable to bring any arguments and rely on insult and moving goal posts.


Well, if you knew anything about Jesus, you would know what you do leaves no possibility for anyone to be proud of you. Pride has no part in Christianity. But what would you a teenager know about Christianity. You just had your BACKSIDE spanked and your face is as red as you bum.

Ignorance isn't bliss in your case it is the blind falling in your own ditch,.

Of course Sassy, of course. Stay warm this winter, and do be careful around sharp objects won't you.

My son is about your age and I hope I have raised him well enough so he never stoops to such a low condescending attitude as you have. I am sure he won't because he tends only to discuss the things he knows about. He listens and learns about the subjects he doesn't. Who knows... is there any hope for you.
What is amazingly plain is you incapability to admit you know nothing about Christ or Christianity. Yet you engage in discussion to attack and dismiss others who do.
I feel sad for you because you are oblivious to the facts or simply don't care. I am not sure that is a good combination for any young mind.

Here is your problem - you are oblivious to the facts or simply don't care - they are NOT facts!

They never have been and never will be until there is verifiable proof positive that the god upon which you base all your belief exists.

Until then it is the same as mine, to a believer a matter of faith - to a non-believer it is nothing but conjecture and, until you can accept that the attacks upon you and you belief will continue and as long as you denigrate and dismiss the beliefs of others you will find yours denigrated and dismissed in the language that each of your opponents finds best illustrates their position on the matter!

[Sassy]

Sassy,

My son is about your age and I hope I have raised him well enough so he never stoops to such a low condescending attitude as you have. I am sure he won't because he tends only to discuss the things he knows about. He listens and learns about the subjects he doesn't. Who knows... is there any hope for you.
What is amazingly plain is you incapability to admit you know nothing about Christ or Christianity. Yet you engage in discussion to attack and dismiss others who do.
I feel sad for you because you are oblivious to the facts or simply don't care. I am not sure that is a good combination for any young mind.

I really don't know how to engage with you - you seem to be entirely incapable of constructing an argument of any kind, and entirely incapable too of recognising arguments when other people do make them. Instead your posts consist of cut and pasted chunks of bible passages and petty insults, and that's it.

If that was the case you would not be responding to my post, would you?
My post is clear you know nothing about Christ or Christianity. Seems clear enough to myself and others reading. Because you lack that knowledge you descend into attack and writing such rubbish as above. Oh, I KNOW you think repeating your rubbish will somehow annoy or irritate believers like myself.
But the truth is you are incapable of addressing anything that is being discussed and your childish and impoverished behaviour and answers make the adults feel so sorry for you. I guess with age comes wisdom. But you have long way to go.

Here for example you accuse me of knowing nothing about Christ etc. I readily accept that you have memorised much more of your "holy" text than I ever have or would want to. That though has nothing whatever to do with discussions about whether there's any reason at all to think that the claims of divinity are actually true.

Had you any knowledge of the bible contents then you would not make such ignorant statements. I know and understand what it means for Christ to be divine on all levels of thinking. However you can show us that you do. Post them without googling and see what all the possibilities are and then we can correct you.

And that's why by and large I ignore your posts - you have nothing of interest to say because proselytising and insulting offers nothing with which I can engage.

You ignore my posts... really... yet here you are constantly replying.
The truth is you have NO education about Christ and the bible to reply. You fail to understand how the bible is relevant to arguments or how believers express belief using their support. WHY?

Because you know NOTHING about Christ in relation to scriptures or the things of God. Now truth is a greater weapon than you hiding behind a false argument.

[Sassy]

What do believers believe makes a person saved in Christ.
Bluehillside need not bother posting he hasn't a clue and he isn't a believer.
Have to point the obvious out as he could not understand the original post asked believers....

[floo]

Another giggle from Sass, who doesn't seem to realise how ludicrous her posts are. She accuses others of not knowing anything about the Bible, but what she really means is not knowing about her particular creation of that book! A number of Christians on this forum don't see it her way!

[Owlswing]

Another giggle from Sass, who doesn't seem to realise how ludicrous her posts are. She accuses others of not knowing anything about the Bible, but what she really means is not knowing about her particular creation of that book! A number of Christians on this forum don't see it her way!

Thank F for that!

Amen!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sassy,

Me:

I really don't know how to engage with you - you seem to be entirely incapable of constructing an argument of any kind, and entirely incapable too of recognising arguments when other people do make them. Instead your posts consist of cut and pasted chunks of bible passages and petty insults, and that's it.

Here for example you accuse me of knowing nothing about Christ etc. I readily accept that you have memorised much more of your "holy" text than I ever have or would want to. That though has nothing whatever to do with discussions about whether there's any reason at all to think that the claims of divinity are actually true.

And that's why by and large I ignore your posts - you have nothing of interest to say because proselytising and insulting offers nothing with which I can engage.

You:

If that was the case you would not be responding to my post, would you?

My post is clear you know nothing about Christ or Christianity. Seems clear enough to myself and others reading. Because you lack that knowledge you descend into attack and writing such rubbish as above. Oh, I KNOW you think repeating your rubbish will somehow annoy or irritate believers like myself.

But the truth is you are incapable of addressing anything that is being discussed and your childish and impoverished behaviour and answers make the adults feel so sorry for you. I guess with age comes wisdom. But you have long way to go.

Had you any knowledge of the bible contents then you would not make such ignorant statements. I know and understand what it means for Christ to be divine on all levels of thinking. However you can show us that you do. Post them without googling and see what all the possibilities are and then we can correct you.

You ignore my posts... really... yet here you are constantly replying.

The truth is you have NO education about Christ and the bible to reply. You fail to understand how the bible is relevant to arguments or how believers express belief using their support. WHY?

Because you know NOTHING about Christ in relation to scriptures or the things of God. Now truth is a greater weapon than you hiding behind a false argument.

QED

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad the Vulgarian,

Hillside I don't think I have ever said I can prove God…

But you have claimed that “God” is an objective fact, only non-believers in “Him” haven’t had the house call or can’t grasp your knock down reasoning for it.

I have suggested that yes but with the qualifier that I cannot prove it within the demand materialistic evidence. God as I suggest is bigger than that.

It looks like you have therefore a strawman argument.

What you are worried about is that people have the temerity to suggest alternatives to the culturally received ''wisdom'' that the world is indeed only a material entity.
We even had that JeremyP character suggesting that unless God could be established as a fact we weren't even allowed to make ''If God exists.....'' statements. An amazingly stupid, intellectually fascist statement which shuts down thinking. Such censorship is what allows people to legitimately ask why are you frightened? What is it you want to suppress so badly?

Whatever you call your crusade Hillside, what it actually is, is a faith commitment to an unestablished belief.

 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad the Vulgarian,

I have suggested that yes but with the qualifier that I cannot prove it within the demand materialistic evidence. God as I suggest is bigger than that.

It looks like you have therefore a strawman argument.

No, you cannot "prove" it or even show it to be more probably likely than not within any definition of reason or evidence - materialistic or not. "I intuit it" is not a method - it's just a claim.

As ever, the straw man is all yours.

What you are worried about is that people have the temerity to suggest alternatives to the culturally received ''wisdom'' that the world is indeed only a material entity.

Bullshit. You can "suggest" anything you like, no-one does say that the world necessarily is "only" material (that's another of your straw men), and you're still stuck with the problem that your arguments "work" just as well for fairies, Stan the Stork or any other conjecture anyone else may happen to dream up.     

We even had that JeremyP character suggesting that unless God could be established as a fact we weren't even allowed to make ''If God exists.....'' statements. An amazingly stupid, intellectually fascist statement which shuts down thinking.

Given your track history of straw men and misrepresentation and the absence of a citation I'd be very surprised if JeremyP has said that, but he can answer for himself. "If God exists..." statements are though a very long way from "God is" statement and you cannot just elide one into the other.

Such censorship is what allows people to legitimately ask why are you frightened? What is it you want to suppress so badly?

No-one is frightened, and no-one wants to suppress anything - what some of us object to though is the deep irrationality and dishonesty on which your claims rest when you overreach and insist that those claims are objectively true.

Whatever you call your crusade Hillside, what it actually is, is a faith commitment to an unestablished belief.

There is no crusade.

I note by the way that you've just avoided my dismantling of your last effort. 'Twas ever thus I guess.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No-one is frightened, and no-one wants to suppress anything -

The evidence in behaviours suggests otherwise. However if not fear the behaviour certainly suggest focus obsession.

As for your claims of being the defender of rationality....there is too much evidence that you are mistaking that for the defence of philosophical naturalism as espoused by your saints like Sean Carroll and the rest of the antitheist posse.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

what some of us object to though is the deep irrationality and dishonesty on which your claims rest when you overreach and insist that those claims are objectively true.

Two things here
1) The generic fallacy that religious claims are ''lies''.
2) You completely ignore the fact that I merely state in an intellectual argument from the may be position and it looks as though you did that to maintain your much beloved fantasy of religious people being bad.
3) The intellectual fascist accusation for you is your wish to remove religious people from public forums unless they pretend to be secular humanists or do the antitheist equivalent of taking of shoes or wearing a hat when entering public forums and not talk from or about religion.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad the Vulgarian,

The evidence in behaviours suggests otherwise.

Claiming that JeremyP said something he’s very unlikely to have said is not “evidence”.

However if not fear the behaviour certainly suggest focus obsession.

Only in your head Vlad, only in your head.

As for your claims of being the defender of rationality....

Another straw man. I make no claim to “defend” anything. I do though demonstrate by arguments that you cannot or refuse to rebut that your position is irrational.

…there is too much evidence that you are mistaking that for the defence of philosophical naturalism as espoused by your saints like Sean Carroll and the rest of the antitheist posse.

Another straw man. Again, no-one “defends” PM (let alone your misunderstanding of it) – all we do say though is that claims of the supernatural cannot be examined or tested with the tools of materialism, and nor in the absence of any other method can they be examined or tested by anything else.

Why is this so difficult for you to grasp? 

Two things here

1) The generic fallacy that religious claims are ''lies''.

Another straw man. You can be wrong without lying.

2) You completely ignore the fact that I merely state in an intellectual argument from the may be position and it looks as though you did that to maintain your much beloved fantasy of religious people being bad.

Another straw man. You can be wrong without being bad.

You can argue anything you like from a “may be” – about gods or fairies – but that says nothing to your overreaching from a “may be” to an “is”.

Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?

3) The intellectual fascist accusation for you is your wish to remove religious people from public forums unless they pretend to be secular humanists or do the antitheist equivalent of taking of shoes or wearing a hat when entering public forums and not talk from or about religion.

Another straw man. I have no wish to remove anyone from anything. To the contrary, I very much people to prefer people to have their say so their ideas can be examined and tested.

That you refuse ever to engage with the arguments against you preferring instead just to avoid or to misrepresent them goes to your deep dishonesty, but it doesn’t mean that I want to stop you from crashing and burning every time you post. 

Why would I?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

1) The generic fallacy that religious claims are ''lies''.

Another straw man. You can be wrong without lying.

[/quote]
You claimed that religious claims were based on dishonesty.

Let me state this for you clearly Hillside. Neither you nor I can ''prove'' our core beliefs. That is why we have the word belief.