Jesus Christ, Our Saviour

[BeRational]

Is it?

Yes, so don't ever use it. Simple.
I cannot reliably lead you to the truth, so if you care about truth never use faith.

[NicholasMarks]

Yes, so don't ever use it. Simple.
I cannot reliably lead you to the truth, so if you care about truth never use faith.

Faith is believing the teaching of someone when that teaching is outside our normal experience but has a good chance of being true...like in the face of a cruel and heartless world there is a force for good which is there for all who abide by the rules. If science had reached its end-point we could put our faith in it entirely, but it hasn't. Jesus Christ's teaching is needed and to get there we need righteousness and truth and faith in his teaching.

[BeRational]

Faith is believing the teaching of someone when that teaching is outside our normal experience but has a good chance of being true...like in the face of a cruel and heartless world there is a force for good which is there for all who abide by the rules. If science had reached its end-point we could put our faith in it entirely, but it hasn't. Jesus Christ's teaching is needed and to get there we need righteousness and truth and faith in his teaching.

You can only assess it has a good chance if you have evidence. You never need faith.

Faith will not lead you reliably to truth.

You can believe anything by faith!

[Anchorman]

Faith is believing the teaching of someone when that teaching is outside our normal experience but has a good chance of being true...like in the face of a cruel and heartless world there is a force for good which is there for all who abide by the rules. If science had reached its end-point we could put our faith in it entirely, but it hasn't. Jesus Christ's teaching is needed and to get there we need righteousness and truth and faith in his teaching.

That's not the accurate, dynamic aeroplane trail truth, though.
Not according to that Bible you say you follow - accurately.
Try reading the definition of faith as recorded therein, without ruining it by misinterpretation, please.

[NicholasMarks]

That's not the accurate, dynamic aeroplane trail truth, though.
Not according to that Bible you say you follow - accurately.
Try reading the definition of faith as recorded therein, without ruining it by misinterpretation, please.

Faith grows and grows Anchorman according to the problems we face. One of the problems faced by today's population is that people are being wound-up by the hysterical behaviour of celebrities on the tele. Its all carnival stuff pretending to be for real...where responsibility is abandoned for the sake of a good joke...but we all have to pay the price for our frivolity because we waste the one property that can keep us healthy and this is our spiritual energy, that, by faith, can be harnessed for our health, strength and good-order, whilst those planning this play-time have more serious things in mind, that we won't thank them for.

[Gordon]

Faith grows and grows Anchorman according to the problems we face. One of the problems faced by today's population is that people are being wound-up by the hysterical behaviour of celebrities on the tele.

I'm not: I avoid 'celebrity' stuff like I would avoid dysentery or folk music (which of these would be worse is debatable).

Its all carnival stuff pretending to be for real...where responsibility is abandoned for the sake of a good joke...but we all have to pay the price for our frivolity because we waste the one property that can keep us healthy and this is our spiritual energy, that, by faith, can be harnessed for our health, strength and good-order, whilst those planning this play-time have more serious things in mind, that we won't thank them for.

No it isn't: most of us can manage the balance between the frivolous and the serious perfectly adequately so as to suit our personal inclinations and circumstances.

As is often the case, Nick, your are generalising on the basis of your own assumptions and preferences.

[Sebastian Toe]

Its all carnival stuff pretending to be for real

As long as you are intelligent enough to realise that then you wont have a problem.
For example the wind up merchants on youtube etc who pretend that there is a rogue planet currently in our solar system that only they can see  Now that really is a wind up.
So if you believe those idiots then you really do have a problem!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yes, so don't ever use it. Simple.
I cannot reliably lead you to the truth, so if you care about truth never use faith.

I think it's trusting something and that partly comes from the reliability and nature of whatever it is you are putting your trust in.


So your prescriptive tone is rejected by me on the grounds of it's arse clenching vomit inducing scientism and materialism.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I cannot reliably lead you to the truth, .

I think we've all noticed.

[Gordon]

I think it's trusting something and that partly comes from the reliability and nature of whatever it is you are putting your trust in.

So, if someone was to trust the Christian Bible, and in particular the NT, how would they go about verifying the accuracy of the contents so as to justify their feeling that the Christian Bible was trustworthy?

[BeRational]

I think it's trusting something and that partly comes from the reliability and nature of whatever it is you are putting your trust in.


So your prescriptive tone is rejected by me on the grounds of it's arse clenching vomit inducing scientism and materialism.

If something has proven to be reliable, like the sun is rising each day, then believe it. Faith is not required.
Never use faith, as it is not a reliable path to truth.

Do you agree that faith is not a reliable path to truth?

[trippymonkey]

How would YOU explain Jesus to some hardened Muslim guy then?

Nick

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If something has proven to be reliable, like the sun is rising each day, then believe it. Faith is not required.
Never use faith, as it is not a reliable path to truth.

Do you agree that faith is not a reliable path to truth?

If faith is as you deny, but I don't have to, trust in the reliability of something. Then trusting something that will lead into truth is the right way to go.

You typify scientism and materialism. Logic and reason is what you use in discussion once scientism and materialism are exhausted which sadly for you never happens.

[BeRational]

If faith is as you deny, but I don't have to, trust in the reliability of something. Then trusting something that will lead into truth is the right way to go.

You typify scientism and materialism. Logic and reason is what you use in discussion once scientism and materialism are exhausted which sadly for you never happens.

I did not understand that at all.

Can you rephrase?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So, if someone was to trust the Christian Bible, and in particular the NT, how would they go about verifying the accuracy of the contents so as to justify their feeling that the Christian Bible was trustworthy?

The New Prescription is not a scientific text book and will not help those looking to it for prescription and bypassing the God who inspires it.

You seem to be focussing on it as a ''cause'' for what strikes me as a caricature Christianity and Christians.

That isn't Christianity so your guesses are as good as mine. In Christianity you put your trust in God who then or prior to that trust illuminates elements of the bible. The bible is more like a head up display than a monolithic thing.

If you are having a bad reaction to the New Testament then something is happening in your spiritual life IMV. Even I would say a feeling that it is there to stop people having a bit of fun.
[/quote]

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I did not understand that at all.

Can you rephrase?

OK....Your definition of truth is based in materialism and scientism.

The faith part of that in your own interpretation of faith is your faith in scientism and materialism. Two philosophies which cannot be proved scientifically or materially.

All you are effectively saying therefore is your faith is the only one which leads to truth.

[BeRational]

OK....Your definition of truth is based in materialism and scientism.

The faith part of that in your own interpretation of faith is your faith in scientism and materialism. Two philosophies which cannot be proved scientifically or materially.

All you are effectively saying therefore is your faith is the only one which leads to truth.

Not faith, I have no faith remember, I have trust in certain things depending on the supporting evidence.

You know that people believe conflicting things based on their personal faith?

Clearly, they cannot all be true! So faith is not a reliable path to truth.

Evidence, and reason is.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not faith, I have no faith remember, I have trust in certain things depending on the supporting evidence.

You know that people believe conflicting things based on their personal faith?

certainly...…... you are arguing against faith from a faith position which has been spelt out to you. How conflicted is that?

[BeRational]

certainly...…... you are arguing against faith from a faith position which has been spelt out to you. How conflicted is that?

I have no faith. I use reason and evidence not faith.

You can believe ANYTHING by faith. Do you accept that?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I have no faith. I use reason and evidence not faith.

Where is the evidence that your words are the truth?

[BeRational]

Where is the evidence that your words are the truth?

One person believes in Jesus by faith.

One person believe in Thor by faith.

One person believes in ..... by faith.

Let' say they all believe mutually exclusive things. How can you tell if any of them believe something that is true.

Reason and evidence is the opposite of faith.

[ippy]

Doesn't having faith involve putting rationality to one side Vlad?

Regards ippy

[BeRational]

Where is the evidence that your words are the truth?

Test them.

I say if you jump off a high build you will fall and die.

You could believe the opposite by faith if you like. But I suggest you do not try it

[Anchorman]

Doesn't having faith involve putting rationality to one side Vlad?

Regards ippy

Nope.

[BeRational]

Nope.

Can you give an example of something you believe just on faith?