Atheism is a lie

[destinata7]

pah, I agree.

chamberlain,

Do you believe in unicorns? Of course not. Why? Because there is no evidence for them. The only counts of someone actually seeing or talking to one are contained in stories which we readily accept as myths, and fancy fairytales can't be used as evidence!...hmmm, that analogy got deeper than I thought it would!

In science, a lack of evidence warrants nonexistence. I mean, are you wanting archeologists to uncover an ancient stone tablet which reads "GOD DOES NOT EXIST"? I guess that could be counted as evidence against god...

If we thought like you, we would all have to believe in unicorns because there is not tangible evidence against them. We would also have to believe in fuglyploofs. You might say, "That's ridiculous-- you totally just pulled the word 'fuglyploof' out of your butt." Perhaps...but where is your evidence against their existence, eh?

Ah, but do you believe that it is possible that unicorns did exist. Are Dodo birds mythical as well? Did George Washington, Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln ever exist. Is it possible in two thousand years the "proof" that these great men existed will be considered as nothing more than legend or myth (there is already alot of speculation on established stories taught in US schools about these three men).

But I forgot, you don't have to prove that God does not exist to firmly establish your belief that He does not!!! Sounds like one-sided reasoning to me.

Roll with me here for a minute. You have no physical proof that can be universally recognized that God exists or doesn't exist.

1) If you are right and God does not exist you have gained what in life? Being a pessimistic individual with whom the glass is always half-empty?

2) If you are wrong and God does exist you could have a problem in the afterlife (not saying you're going to hell you know my belief on that one).


Then there is the whole issue of the Holy Spirit. If you haven't had an experience with the Holy Spirit it's a no-brainer why you have a hard time with there being a God.

Remember, you can't see the wind but can still prove that it exists because of the effects that it has on our surroundings. The Holy Spirit is like the wind, its effects are widespread and far-reaching. God is there Ceridwen...........you just may be looking in the wrong places for AM (God isn't male or female so I don't like to say "Him").

I'm not trying to pick on you, I just don't believe that your lot in life is supposed to be atheism. I think that you actually believe in God but not in the way that the common churches do. You see flaws in their doctrines and it has turned you off. Your terminology may be different than mine but the concepts are closer than many people would think.

Sincerely,

 

[Pah]

Ah, but do you believe that it is possible that unicorns did exist. Are Dodo birds mythical as well? Did George Washington, Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln ever exist. Is it possible in two thousand years the "proof" that these great men existed will be considered as nothing more than legend or myth (there is already alot of speculation on established stories taught in US schools about these three men).

The men you mentioned will have a provable history, a wealth of official information. Certainly God does not, and whatever little exists for Jesus is contestable

But I forgot, you don't have to prove that God does not exist to firmly establish your belief that He does not!!! Sounds like one-sided reasoning to me.

Actually, it is a lack of scientific reasoning on the part of those who think God exists/existed.

Roll with me here for a minute. You have no physical proof that can be universally recognized that God exists or doesn't exist.

1) If you are right and God does not exist you have gained what in life? Being a pessimistic individual with whom the glass is always half-empty?

Your term "pessimistic" shows a bias and is not borne out in our lives. I've always found that when the glass becomes half-empty, I can always refill it.

2) If you are wrong and God does exist you could have a problem in the afterlife (not saying you're going to hell you know my belief on that one).

If I am wrong then I will have had a good live - and the rest is but sleep.

Then there is the whole issue of the Holy Spirit. If you haven't had an experience with the Holy Spirit it's a no-brainer why you have a hard time with there being a God.

I have spoken in tounges in joyous prayer - a gift of the spirit. It came to me because of expectations as a "born again" beleiver

Remember, you can't see the wind but can still prove that it exists because of the effects that it has on our surroundings. The Holy Spirit is like the wind, its effects are widespread and far-reaching. God is there Ceridwen...........you just may be looking in the wrong places for AM (God isn't male or female so I don't like to say "Him").

I can measure the wind - can you measure the Holy Spirit?

I'm not trying to pick on you, I just don't believe that your lot in life is supposed to be atheism. I think that you actually believe in God but not in the way that the common churches do. You see flaws in their doctrines and it has turned you off. Your terminology may be different than mine but the concepts are closer than many people would think.

Sincerely,

Your "lot" in life is what you make it. I've been there, done that, and left it as false. - an illusion of faith from phsychology, myth and environment.

 

[destinata7]

The men you mentioned will have a provable history, a wealth of official information. Certainly God does not, and whatever little exists for Jesus is contestable

I said in two thousand years from now. How do you know if there will still exist this "wealth" of info proving these three men. Like I said, several of the stories about them are already challenged as myth. There were alot more writings about Jesus that no longer exist two thousand years later, you only strengthen my point.

Actually, it is a lack of scientific reasoning on the part of those who think God exists/existed.

Nice statement, but I must beg to disagree with you.

Your term "pessimistic" shows a bias and is not borne out in our lives. I've always found that when the glass becomes half-empty, I can always refill it.

You are correct, I should not stereo-type all atheist together. Neither should you presume to speak for the mental state of being for all atheists. That would make you guilty of stereo-typing yourself.

If I am wrong then I will have had a good live - and the rest is but sleep.

If you're wrong, the rest is not but sleep! You mean if you are right. If you are wrong there is an afterlife and answers that must be given. If you are right there is not an afterlife and you will "but sleep".

I have spoken in tounges in joyous prayer - a gift of the spirit. It came to me because of expectations as a "born again" beleiver

So you're admitting you spoke in togues only because you were expected to. Sounds like a real "joyous" and legitimate experience you had.

I can measure the wind - can you measure the Holy Spirit?

The wind is limited because it is temporal. The Holy Spirit cannot be measured by humans as it is not temporal or limited as the wind. It's called an "analogy". Trying to destroy an analogy by literalizing it is an old trick. I'm not impressed.

Your "lot" in life is what you make it. I've been there, done that, and left it as false. - an illusion of faith from phsychology, myth and environment.

You're assuming that I meant "lot" as a type of destiny/fate. I don't believe in fate. But I do believe in destiny. Can you choose a different destiny? I believe so. I just think that some people choose lower destinies. They have a right to do this because of free choice. And I have the right to encourage them to do something else because of free choice.

 

[Pah]

The men you mentioned will have a provable history, a wealth of official information. Certainly God does not, and whatever little exists for Jesus is contestable

I said in two thousand years from now. How do you know if there will still exist this "wealth" of info proving these three men. Like I said, several of the stories about them are already challenged as myth. There were alot more writings about Jesus that no longer exist two thousand years later, you only strengthen my point.

The advance of technology has show more and more durable information storage. The dispersion of the data is another factor in insuring it's longevity.

I am not talking about the "stories" (you are right that the myths are being challanged). - I'm talking about the official records of government and the history that is recorded. Ben Franklin and George Washington signed the original Constitution and every effort is made by the US government to preserve that document. There was a reason I underlined "official".

Actually, it is a lack of scientific reasoning on the part of those who think God exists/existed.

Nice statement, but I must beg to disagree with you.

Then please tell us of the scientific data that supports the existence of God.

Your term "pessimistic" shows a bias and is not borne out in our lives. I've always found that when the glass becomes half-empty, I can always refill it.

You are correct, I should not stereo-type all atheist together. Neither should you presume to speak for the mental state of being for all atheists. That would make you guilty of stereo-typing yourself.

You're right and I apologize. It would be correct to have said "some" whilst including myself.

If I am wrong then I will have had a good live - and the rest is but sleep.

If you're wrong, the rest is not but sleep! You mean if you are right. If you are wrong there is an afterlife and answers that must be given. If you are right there is not an afterlife and you will "but sleep".

Not from my experiences. See my thread Life after my death. But please don't characterize what a life after death entrails - there is no proof - only a biblical interpretation.

I have spoken in tounges in joyous prayer - a gift of the spirit. It came to me because of expectations as a "born again" beleiver

So you're admitting you spoke in togues only because you were expected to. Sounds like a real "joyous" and legitimate experience you had.

Yes it was - I don't think I've ever had greater joy. In medicine, don't you think that it is wonderful that 20% of those that take placebo's feel better with disappearing symptoms

I can measure the wind - can you measure the Holy Spirit?

The wind is limited because it is temporal. The Holy Spirit cannot be measured by humans as it is not temporal or limited as the wind. It's called an "analogy". Trying to destroy an analogy by literalizing it is an old trick. I'm not impressed.

Then your comparision of wind and Holy Spirit is not apt. Proving your case by weak assertion is not proof. (The asseertion being that you can see the effects of the Holy Spirit - it also fails because your presumption that the Holy Spirit is resposiible is a fallacy)

Your "lot" in life is what you make it. I've been there, done that, and left it as false. - an illusion of faith from phsychology, myth and environment.

You're assuming that I meant "lot" as a type of destiny/fate. I don't believe in fate. But I do believe in destiny. Can you choose a different destiny? I believe so. I just think that some people choose lower destinies. They have a right to do this because of free choice. And I have the right to encourage them to do something else because of free choice.

Free will erases the concept of destiny - you can have one or the other but they are mutually exclusive. What you can do is choose a different path but that changes your destiny. What you are describing is a path for destiny that after splitting meets itself further on. Destiny, in my mind is a foreordained end result regardless of the branches of the path to it.

 

[destinata7]

The advance of technology has show more and more durable information storage. The dispersion of the data is another factor in insuring it's longevity.

You don't even know if the United States will exist in two thousand years. Yes data storage is getting better, but seeing how incredibly poor data storage was two thousand years ago that only strengthens the point that there is much information on Jesus Christ that has been lost.

I am not talking about the "stories" (you are right that the myths are being challanged). - I'm talking about the official records of government and the history that is recorded. Ben Franklin and George Washington signed the original Constitution and every effort is made by the US government to preserve that document. There was a reason I underlined "official".

Do you suppose the authenticity of any signed document has ever been challenged? Look, I know that those three people existed. The point I was making is that with the passing of time what was once deemed credible history becomes possibly legend and then myth. It doesn't mean there wasn't any credibility to the original story at all.

Then please tell us of the scientific data that supports the existence of God.

I suppose that you have scientific data that proves that God does not exist, hence your disbelief that there is any possibility at all that God could exist. Let's hear yours first.....

If I am wrong then I will have had a good live - and the rest is but sleep.

Not from my experiences. See my thread Life after my death. But please don't characterize what a life after death entrails - there is no proof - only a biblical interpretation.

Actually I believe that you said "if I am wrong.....the rest is but sleep". Let me get this straight, if you're right you're right.....but if you're wrong you're still right? Interesting argument.

Yes it was - I don't think I've ever had greater joy. In medicine, don't you think that it is wonderful that 20% of those that take placebo's feel better with disappearing symptoms.

Most of this 20% not only feel better.....they are better. Some people would try to suggest that this means that the symptoms were originally entirely psychsomatic. Only problem is, with recent studies they have found that placebos actually can cure real problems, some of them as severe as knee injuries requiring orthroscopic surgery. In a test group, just as many people recovered from "fake" orthroscopic surgery as those who had the real thing. This wasn't a National Enquirer article either, but a highly reputed news magazine.

The power of the human mind over the human body is truly incredible. That is why women have lifted entire vehicles off of their children. Adrenaline? Or untapped power that we are not used to generating? Anything made in the image of God, even if it is a poor copy, is going to contain a great deal of power and capability.

Then your comparision of wind and Holy Spirit is not apt. Proving your case by weak assertion is not proof. (The asseertion being that you can see the effects of the Holy Spirit - it also fails because your presumption that the Holy Spirit is resposiible is a fallacy)

Definition of analogy:

1. Correspondence in some respects between things otherwise dissimilar.

American Heritage Dictionary

Au contraire, it was a good analogy. And I have seen and felt the effects of the Holy Spirit. If you are convinced that the effects of the Holy Spirit are a placebo than I am sure you must have some tangible proof of this... gut feelings don't count.

You're assuming that I meant "lot" as a type of destiny/fate. I don't believe in fate. But I do believe in destiny. Can you choose a different destiny? I believe so. I just think that some people choose lower destinies. They have a right to do this because of free choice. And I have the right to encourage them to do something else because of free choice.

Free will erases the concept of destiny - you can have one or the other but they are mutually exclusive. What you can do is choose a different path but that changes your destiny. What you are describing is a path for destiny that after splitting meets itself further on. Destiny, in my mind is a foreordained end result regardless of the branches of the path to it.

Then we have much different definitions of "destiny". You are giving "destiny" the same definition of "fate". My belief is that destiny is more of a "calling" and there is more than one potential "calling" and they lead to very different ends. And you are correct that the concept of free will erases the concept of fate.

That is one of the major problems with the ever so popular doctrine of "election". It destroys free will and turns life into fate.

 

[destinata7]

Exodus 20:5 For I am the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation

Ezekiel 18:20 The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father

FYI the scripture in Exodus is referring to the lingering genetic and influential instructional effects that can be passed on to one's own children when the progenerator has given himself over to hate. It can take generations to purify these negative effects from the offspring.

This verse is in the same chapter of Ezekiel:

Ezekiel 18:2
What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge?

The Israelites had observed that "the apple doesn't fall from the tree". So to save the future trouble, they would punish the apple and the tree.

One problem with this is that sometimes the apple does fall far from the tree. Another problem is that one should never be punished for a crime they haven't committed (hats off to Minority Report).

Ezekiel repudiated this practice as unlawful because it wasn't scriptural.....not because he was an atheist or ignorant of the laws of Moses ( the Ten Commandments were pretty popular reading with those Jewish folks, you know).

These are not contradicting scriptures. They are "apparent" contradictions, but can be explained just like any other "apparent contradictions" that you could throw my way! (Yes, that was an official challenge)

 

[Mr Spinkles]

destinata wrote:

Ah, but do you believe that it is possible that unicorns did exist. Are Dodo birds mythical as well? Did George Washington, Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln ever exist. Is it possible in two thousand years the "proof" that these great men existed will be considered as nothing more than legend or myth (there is already alot of speculation on established stories taught in US schools about these three men).

Are you suggesting that although God does not exist today, He did exist some time in the past, but the evidence was lost? By the way, it is possible that unicorns did once exist....the question is, how possible? Probable, or improbable?

At any rate, if God exists at present, then it is not a matter of lost historical evidence, it is a matter of non-existent current evidence.

 

[destinata7]

destinata wrote:

Ah, but do you believe that it is possible that unicorns did exist. Are Dodo birds mythical as well? Did George Washington, Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln ever exist. Is it possible in two thousand years the "proof" that these great men existed will be considered as nothing more than legend or myth (there is already alot of speculation on established stories taught in US schools about these three men).

Are you suggesting that although God does not exist today, He did exist some time in the past, but the evidence was lost? By the way, it is possible that unicorns did once exist....the question is, how possible? Probable, or improbable?

At any rate, if God exists at present, then it is not a matter of lost historical evidence, it is a matter of non-existent current evidence.

Mr Spinkles, you know that I'm not saying that God doesn't exist today. You know this because you have read some of my other posts.

My point was about Jesus Christ specifically and the lack of evidence someone else was proposing that exists that Jesus Christ existed at all.

It is sad if you are basing your beliefs on probabilities. However, the point is that if an atheist can admit that there is the slightest possibility that God exists, this opens the door for persuasion.

So if Mr Spinkles says there's a 1% chance, I'm all over him like white on rice!

Bottom line: If an atheist cannot prove that God doesn't exist....they have to acknowledge that there could be a chance that he does exist!

Once they acknowledge that ,as you inadvertently did, they are forced to at least consider the consequences of being wrong!

However, if an atheist's entire proposal of God's non-existence cannot be proven and they insist that they are right despite of the lack of evidence for their viewpoint.......they are wielding the same type of blind faith in their non-God as many christians exhibit in their God....and are criticized by atheists for!!!

Ironic, isn't it Mr Spinkles?

 

[Pah]

The advance of technology has show more and more durable information storage. The dispersion of the data is another factor in insuring it's longevity.

You don't even know if the United States will exist in two thousand years. Yes data storage is getting better, but seeing how incredibly poor data storage was two thousand years ago that only strengthens the point that there is much information on Jesus Christ that has been lost.

The existence of the United States is not required for information to kept.

There is historical information of the period of Christ written by the major historians of the time. It confirms Christianity but is not credible in affirming Christ. What is noteworthy that and perhaps with an exception or two, none of the verifyible data from the biblical rendition is verified. There is another thread going should you choose to carry on this theme. And also of note, a body of information was purposely destroyed and surpressed that would have shed light on Christ because of the bias of the Early Church and developing theology.

I am not talking about the "stories" (you are right that the myths are being challanged). - I'm talking about the official records of government and the history that is recorded. Ben Franklin and George Washington signed the original Constitution and every effort is made by the US government to preserve that document. There was a reason I underlined "official".

Do you suppose the authenticity of any signed document has ever been challenged? Look, I know that those three people existed. The point I was making is that with the passing of time what was once deemed credible history becomes possibly legend and then myth. It doesn't mean there wasn't any credibility to the original story at all.

I have not seen any challange to the authenticity of the major documents - personal letters here and there of course but not the official documents. It is far more likely that information of the years immediately following the "resurrection" was amplified in the oral transmission than was lost

Then please tell us of the scientific data that supports the existence of God.

I suppose that you have scientific data that proves that God does not exist, hence your disbelief that there is any possibility at all that God could exist. Let's hear yours first.....

I have none. Investigation in science is done on matters that do exist or are supposed to exist by hypothesis. Science deals with the "natural". God is supernatural and science can not observe or measure that. But it does show (and not by intent) that the hypothetical biblical creation is bunk as a science..

If I am wrong then I will have had a good live - and the rest is but sleep.

Not from my experiences. See my thread Life after my death. But please don't characterize what a life after death entrails - there is no proof - only a biblical interpretation.

Actually I believe that you said "if I am wrong.....the rest is but sleep". Let me get this straight, if you're right you're right.....but if you're wrong you're still right? Interesting argument.

Thanks

Yes it was - I don't think I've ever had greater joy. In medicine, don't you think that it is wonderful that 20% of those that take placebo's feel better with disappearing symptoms.

Most of this 20% not only feel better.....they are better. Some people would try to suggest that this means that the symptoms were originally entirely psychsomatic. Only problem is, with recent studies they have found that placebos actually can cure real problems, some of them as severe as knee injuries requiring orthroscopic surgery. In a test group, just as many people recovered from "fake" orthroscopic surgery as those who had the real thing. This wasn't a National Enquirer article either, but a highly reputed news magazine.

I have no doubt about the power of a placebo. But I do have doubt about a controlled study of "fake" surgery on a diagnosed problem - I base it on ethical concerns. Could you cite the study for us?

The power of the human mind over the human body is truly incredible. That is why women have lifted entire vehicles off of their children. Adrenaline? Or untapped power that we are not used to generating? Anything made in the image of God, even if it is a poor copy, is going to contain a great deal of power and capability.

Your premise that the body is an image of God needs to be proven before you can talk about the cause and effect. See, this is the point of why you have the burden of proof. You make the claims and have not proven the premise. Now, what proof do you have of God and his word.

Then your comparision of wind and Holy Spirit is not apt. Proving your case by weak assertion is not proof. (The asseertion being that you can see the effects of the Holy Spirit - it also fails because your presumption that the Holy Spirit is resposiible is a fallacy)

...

Au contraire, it was a good analogy. And I have seen and felt the effects of the Holy Spirit. If you are convinced that the effects of the Holy Spirit are a placebo than I am sure you must have some tangible proof of this... gut feelings don't count.

What are the measurements that you've taken? - what are the units of measurement of whatever you are measuring? An effect must have a cause - causes can be measured

The analogy is fine. It is the premise that makes the analogy weak as an indication of the reality of the Holy Spirit.

You're assuming that I meant "lot" as a type of destiny/fate. I don't believe in fate. But I do believe in destiny. Can you choose a different destiny? I believe so. I just think that some people choose lower destinies. They have a right to do this because of free choice. And I have the right to encourage them to do something else because of free choice.

Free will erases the concept of destiny - you can have one or the other but they are mutually exclusive. What you can do is choose a different path but that changes your destiny. What you are describing is a path for destiny that after splitting meets itself further on. Destiny, in my mind is a foreordained end result regardless of the branches of the path to it.

Then we have much different definitions of "destiny". You are giving "destiny" the same definition of "fate". My belief is that destiny is more of a "calling" and there is more than one potential "calling" and they lead to very different ends. And you are correct that the concept of free will erases the concept of fate.

That is one of the major problems with the ever so popular doctrine of "election". It destroys free will and turns life into fate.

Yes semantics seems to the major disagreement here.

 

[destinata7]

The existence of the United States is not required for information to kept.

.....unless all means of storage has been disintegrated in nuclear holocaust. I'm not banking for that though and the purpose for bringing up the point has been lost so I will not argue with you any more on this one.

What is noteworthy that and perhaps with an exception or two, none of the verifyible data from the biblical rendition is verified.

No kidding, it was two thousand years ago! Whose rendition can be really trusted without divine revelation? I know, remember Pete the camel-trader.....he wrote that book about Jesus......he was a pretty reputable guy wasn't he.....let's see, did he ever tell a lie.....I just can't quite remember.....it was two thousand years ago!!!

But seriously, there were reputable renditions, verified by church historians hundreds of years ago! And these are in the Bible! I don't have to prove the impact of the words contained in the gospels that have changed the entire world to an atheist. If the Bible is not your bag, we can talk science and philosophy.

Just remind me not to waste any time quoting you Bible!

And also of note, a body of information was purposely destroyed and surpressed that would have shed light on Christ because of the bias of the Early Church and developing theology.

The Catholic church was responsible for some of this. Also, many books were lost when the library of Alexandria was burned to the ground.

I have not seen any challange to the authenticity of the major documents - personal letters here and there of course but not the official documents.

Your lack of knowledge in the contestation of the authenticity of legal documents can hardly be used as a persuasive point.

I have none. Investigation in science is done on matters that do exist or are supposed to exist by hypothesis.

You have zero proof that God does not exist? Then do you admit that it is possible that he could exist?

Science deals with the "natural". God is supernatural and science can not observe or measure that.

God is both natural and supernatural. God is imbued into all creation. You cannot measure the universe with your minute capacity much less God!

But it does show (and not by intent) that the hypothetical biblical creation is bunk as a science..

That is because the Biblical story of creation has been grossly misinterpreted!

Yes it was - I don't think I've ever had greater joy. In medicine, don't you think that it is wonderful that 20% of those that take placebo's feel better with disappearing symptoms.

I have no doubt about the power of a placebo. But I do have doubt about a controlled study of "fake" surgery on a diagnosed problem - I base it on ethical concerns. Could you cite the study for us?

I'll dig it up for you. It is an amazing article.

Your premise that the body is an image of God needs to be proven before you can talk about the cause and effect. See, this is the point of why you have the burden of proof.

My bad. I forgot that you don't believe in the Bible. I'll have to tackle that point another way....

You do forget, however, that most scientific discoveries start with the observation of the effect and work their way backwards from there. The effect noticed here is that of humans who sometimes unexplainably achieve super-human types of feats. We must work our way backward from that thread....

Au contraire, it was a good analogy. And I have seen and felt the effects of the Holy Spirit. If you are convinced that the effects of the Holy Spirit are a placebo than I am sure you must have some tangible proof of this... gut feelings don't count.

What are the measurements that you've taken? - what are the units of measurement of whatever you are measuring? An effect must have a cause - causes can be measured

There are many effects that the universe has on the earth....yet you cannot measure the universe. It seems infinite from the scientific perspective. So here we have a cause that cannot be measured (besides you already said science can't deal with the super-natural). I'm not really sure what your point is here? You are trying to disprove the Holy Spirit based on an experience that you had which incidentally:

1) If your experience with the Holy Spirit was not legitimate that hardly disproves the existence of the Holy Spirit

2) If your experience with the Holy Spirit was real we have no argument here

The analogy is fine. It is the premise that makes the analogy weak as an indication of the reality of the Holy Spirit.

The Bible itself describes one of the effects of the Holy Spirit on the disciples in the upper chamber as a "mighty rushing wind". I hardly think that it is a stretch to use the wind as an analogy for something sharing similar descriptions.

As to my premise, I'm working backward from the effect again as any good scientist has done. My premise is that I have felt the Holy Spirit quicken me and fill me with love and life......

We believe in the same thing here. You name it "placebo" and I name it "Holy Spirit". Who cares what you name it, the effect is real and usually only happens among christians. You can call it the "Holy Placebo" if you want to........but I want more of it I can tell you that!

You're assuming that I meant "lot" as a type of destiny/fate. I don't believe in fate. But I do believe in destiny. Can you choose a different destiny? I believe so. I just think that some people choose lower destinies. They have a right to do this because of free choice. And I have the right to encourage them to do something else because of free choice.

Yes semantics seems to the major disagreement here.

You see, so many people believe in like ways but are divided over definitions. You probably believe more in God than you know....you just don't like the name "God" because it has been used and abused by so many people.....

The Bible contains a story about these people who worshipped God ignorantly! They didn't call Him "the God of Abraham", but it was the same thing nonetheless. And the Bible says they got the credit that they were worshipping the "Hebrew" God.

If your belief includes the sharing of true love, you are possibly closer to God than some christians.

But some christians will say "you can't make it to heaven by any name but the name of Jesus Christ!" How's that spelled? J_E _S_U _S.....Jesus.

So that's the only name? Jesus?

But I thought that His Hebrew name was "Y'shua".

That's the same thing?

What about all the other names that the Bible says Jesus has: the Lamb, Redeemer, Emanuel, Prince of Peace, Everlasting Father, etc.? Do those work too?

They do?!!!

Why does Jesus need all those other names???

Different charactaristics of Jesus that He uses!

So someone could call on any of the representations of Jesus and be saved?

What did Jesus claim was the greatest message of the commandments?

Love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself!!

Jesus represented love!

The Bible does say that God is love....

And Jesus represented God....

You can be calling out for love and Jesus/Love might answer you?

There just might be hope for you love-filled atheists out there yet!!!

We may be totally bogged down by definitions, but the Spirit of the word is more important and powerful than the Letter of the law.....Jesus clearly taught this when He was busy breaking all of those Jewish laws!

Don't get angry with me, the Bible says all of this, it wasn't my idea.


Take care pah,

It was fun chatting with you.

 

[Pah]

Wow, I'm sorry I missed this fine piece of apologetics

Exodus 20:5 For I am the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation

Ezekiel 18:20 The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father

FYI the scripture in Exodus is referring to the lingering genetic and influential instructional effects that can be passed on to one's own children when the progenerator has given himself over to hate. It can take generations to purify these negative effects from the offspring.

This is the crux of your error. I'll clip the reply for Ezekiel as I agree 18:2 does support the meaning from 18:20 that punishment will not be given to the sons

Isaiaha 42:89 and 48:11 both show the intent of Exodus 20:5

God, in Exodus 20, equates worship of other gods as hatred to him because of his jealousy. It is his jealousy that is core to the verse and not the supposed "hatred" in the hearts of "other god worshipers". The sin of not worshipping him is what is being punished. not a "hate-filled heart"

These are not contradicting scriptures. They are "apparent" contradictions, but can be explained just like any other "apparent contradictions" that you could throw my way! (Yes, that was an official challenge)

Nope, they are still at odds.

I'll accept your challenge by asking you to join the errancy list of Farrell Till
and discuss why there is harmony in the various renderings of the visitations to the empty tomb. You might whet your appetite on "Judah's grandsons" with the list and then there is the "land promise" . You would do significantly better at TheologyWeb.com where only some of the errancy list post and there is a lot of other skeptics that, though better than I, would be less of a challange. (Tell 'em Bob sent ya, the Alumnus of the Year)

 

[destinata7]

Wow, I'm sorry I missed this fine piece of apologetics

Exodus 20:5 For I am the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation

Ezekiel 18:20 The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father

FYI the scripture in Exodus is referring to the lingering genetic and influential instructional effects that can be passed on to one's own children when the progenerator has given himself over to hate. It can take generations to purify these negative effects from the offspring.

This is the crux of your error. I'll clip the reply for Ezekiel as I agree 18:2 does support the meaning from 18:20 that punishment will not be given to the sons

Isaiaha 42:89 and 48:11 both show the intent of Exodus 20:5

God, in Exodus 20, equates worship of other gods as hatred to him because of his jealousy. It is his jealousy that is core to the verse and not the supposed "hatred" in the hearts of "other god worshipers". The sin of not worshipping him is what is being punished. not a "hate-filled heart"

1) Striking off the commentary on the scripture in Ezekiel and justifying this by saying we agree ignores a major point being made here:

a. Ezekiel was a well respected prophet

b. He was closely aware as to the intent of the Hebrew
language regarding this "jealousy" you refer to

c. He was obviously well aware of the Law of Moses and certainly
the ten commandments

d. He believed in the scriptures of the Bible and would have nothing
to gain by attempting to discredit them

e. He perceived that the scripture was being misinterpreted and
decided to straighten out the misinterpretation


2) The Bible contends that God is love (I Jn 4:8 and 4:16)

3) The Bible teaches that agape love (charity) does not envy (I Cor 13:4)

4) The Bible clearly teaches that God the I-AM is perfect and there if no sin found in I-AM (jeolousy interpreted in the manner you are suggesting is listed in the Bible as a sin in Romans 1:29)

5) The Hebrew word interpreted as "jealous" in Exodus 20 is quana which also bears the translation "to be zealous for".

6) Quana is interpreted in the Old Testament as zealous in other places (see Num 25:11 and 25:13).

7) The New Testament qualifies that there is a type of "Godly jealousy"(II Cor 11:2). How could there be such a thing as "Godly jealousy" if jealousy is a sin?

Because according to present day word usage, jealousy is not a good translation of the word. What is the word here? Read point #8.

8.) The Greek word for jealousy in II Cor 11:2 is zelos :
Excitement of mind, fervour of spirit!



Going back to Exodus 20, let us look at the Biblical definition of "Godly jealousy":

God is zealous in Am's love for us and would be saddened that the rejection of this perfect love (hate of God is hate of love if God is love) passes on a damaging effect to one's offspring. There is hope, however, that over the passing of time this inheritance of hate can be converted to love once more!


This is the intent of the scripture in Exodus 20 and once again we have found that a mere difference in definition has impacted your life enough to parade an "apparent contradiction" to others in an attempt to dishearten those that are ignorant as you are in the Scripture.

I'm sure that you are sincere in your disbelief and that is why you are "zealous" to share it with others. But, like I told you in a previous post, if you get past all of these problems of definition and focus on the Spirit of the word as opposed to the letter of the law, in spirit you may believe more in God than you would at first realize......



PS regarding your quote:

Isaiaha 42:89 and 48:11 both show the intent of Exodus 20:5

These scriptures attesting that God will not take away the glory that AM has set aside for you and give it to someone else, attests to and supports the love and mercy of God rather than to justify your stance as God being full of sin.

For one to properly interpret Is 48:11 and to use it to back up a point, one would have to have a sure understanding of "the name" of God and "the sake" of God. That's a whole other discussion though, and this post is getting very long.

 

[Pah]

1) Striking off the commentary on the scripture in Ezekiel and justifying this by saying we agree ignores a major point being made here:

a. Ezekiel was a well respected prophet

b. He was closely aware as to the intent of the Hebrew
language regarding this "jealousy" you refer to

c. He was obviously well aware of the Law of Moses and certainly
the ten commandments

d. He believed in the scriptures of the Bible and would have nothing
to gain by attempting to discredit them

e. He perceived that the scripture was being misinterpreted and
decided to straighten out the misinterpretation

The last is pure speculation. - well, the others are too but they seem to fit.

2) The Bible contends that God is love (I Jn 4:8 and 4:16)

It also protrays a vengeful, barbaric god capable of genocide and infanticide

3) The Bible teaches that agape love (charity) does not envy (I Cor 13:4)

4) The Bible clearly teaches that God the I-AM is perfect and there if no sin found in I-AM (jeolousy interpreted in the manner you are suggesting is listed in the Bible as a sin in Romans 1:29)

Chaulk up another "disharmony"

5) The Hebrew word interpreted as "jealous" in Exodus 20 is quana which also bears the translation "to be zealous for".

Available version of Exodus 20:5 at BibleGateway.com

New International Version (NIV)
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
The Message (MSG) translated as "most jealous"
Amplified Bible (AMP)
New Living Translation (NLT)
King James Version (KJV)
New Life Version (NLV)
English Standard Version (ESV)
Contemporary English Version (CEV) tranlated as "I demand all your love. If you reject me,"
New King James Version (NKJV)
21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
American Standard Version (ASV)
Young's Literal Translation (YLT) translated as "zealous"
Darby Translation (DARBY)
New International Reader's Version (NIRV)
New International Version - UK (NIV-UK)

One, only one uses "zealous" With the exception of CEV (which does not convey the meaning of"zealous"]. All the others use "jealous"

You have just lost credibility is your assessment of the Commandment.

6) Quana is interpreted in the Old Testament as zealous in other places (see Num 25:11 and 25:13).

Available versions of Numbers 25:11 at BibleGateway.com

New International Version (NIV)
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
The Message (MSG) translated as "zealous for Phinehas but "anger" is mentioned for God"
Amplified Bible (AMP)
New Living Translation (NLT) translated as "passionate zeal" and "anger"
King James Version (KJV) both "zealous" and "jealous" used
New Life Version (NLV)
English Standard Version (ESV)
Contemporary English Version (CEV) tranlated as "In my anger, I would have wiped out the Israelites if Phinehas had not been faithful to me. "
New King James Version (NKJV) "wrath" of God "zeal" for Phinehas
21st Century King James Version (KJ21) God's wrath and jealousy, Phinehas' zeal

That's enough to show God had wrath or anger and "zealous" is a mixed bag with "jealous" in speaking of Phinehas and God. I leave it to you, with some degree of confidence, that you will find the same pattern of usage in Num 25:13 which continues to speak of Phinehas. Num 25:13 is not even applicable to God

7) The New Testament qualifies that there is a type of "Godly jealousy"(II Cor 11:2). How could there be such a thing as "Godly jealousy" if jealousy is a sin?

Because according to present day word usage, jealousy is not a good translation of the word. What is the word here? Read point #8.

8.) The Greek word for jealousy in II Cor 11:2 is zelos :
Excitement of mind, fervour of spirit!

The Greek has no bearing on the Hebrew



Going back to Exodus 20, let us look at the Biblical definition of "Godly jealousy":

God is zealous in Am's love for us and would be saddened that the rejection of this perfect love (hate of God is hate of love if God is love) passes on a damaging effect to one's offspring. There is hope, however, that over the passing of time this inheritance of hate can be converted to love once more!


This is the intent of the scripture in Exodus 20 and once again we have found that a mere difference in definition has impacted your life enough to parade an "apparent contradiction" to others in an attempt to dishearten those that are ignorant as you are in the Scripture.

I'm sure that you are sincere in your disbelief and that is why you are "zealous" to share it with others. But, like I told you in a previous post, if you get past all of these problems of definition and focus on the Spirit of the word as opposed to the letter of the law, in spirit you may believe more in God than you would at first realize......

PS regarding your quote:

Isaiaha 42:89 and 48:11 both show the intent of Exodus 20:5

These scriptures attesting that God will not take away the glory that AM has set aside for you and give it to someone else, attests to and supports the love and mercy of God rather than to justify your stance as God being full of sin.

I didn't suggest that God had sin - I merely show the "disharmony" You have assigned sin to God in this thread, not I.

 

[Ceridwen018]

destinata7,

Ah, but do you believe that it is possible that unicorns did exist.

Not really, otherwise we'd have fossils.

Did George Washington, Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln ever exist. Is it possible in two thousand years the "proof" that these great men existed will be considered as nothing more than legend or myth (there is already alot of speculation on established stories taught in US schools about these three men).

Absolutely! And if that be the case, that all of their evidence is either lost or reduced to legend, then people of the future should absolutely NOT believe in them, because they'd be doing so off of blind faith and foundationless reasoning, which is no good.

1) If you are right and God does not exist you have gained what in life? Being a pessimistic individual with whom the glass is always half-empty?

I personally am not pessimistic. I was actually probably more pessimistically minded as a Christian than I am now.

As far as 'gaining' something in life--I'm not going to make myself believe in god just so I can feel special. In my opinion, it's absolutely impossible to make yourself believe something.

2) If you are wrong and God does exist you could have a problem in the afterlife (not saying you're going to hell you know my belief on that one).

Well, if I'm going to believe in god just so I can cover my bases and get into heaven, I'm gonna have to include Zeus and thor as well, just to be safe.

Then there is the whole issue of the Holy Spirit. If you haven't had an experience with the Holy Spirit it's a no-brainer why you have a hard time with there being a God.

How do you define an experience? Lot's of people have 'experiences' with aliens and midnight abductions, why aren't they taken seriously? Deep feelings don't fly well with me. If I said I had deep feelings that I was Abraham Lincoln, I'd be committed.

Remember, you can't see the wind but can still prove that it exists because of the effects that it has on our surroundings. The Holy Spirit is like the wind, its effects are widespread and far-reaching.

How do you know that these 'widespread effects' are really from the holy spirit, and not just from natural happenings, or even just what people hope for.

I'm sorry I haven't replied to you earlier--I've skimmed through the convo between you and pah, and I hope I havn't repeated anything.

 

[destinata7]

Ah, but do you believe that it is possible that unicorns did exist.

Not really, otherwise we'd have fossils.

But do they not keep digging up new fossils all the time of things previously unfound? Look, I could care less about unicorns. My point is that atheists are working off of best guesses as to the supposed non-existence of God. From their best guesses they formulate a "doctrine" of opinion that has no solid proof (of the non-existence of God). Hence they feel that the "probability" according to mis-interpreted scientific data is enough to warrant this stance.

Yet a christian may feel, hear and experience the presence of God via the Holy Spirit or through other representatives and this enforces the pursuasion of "witness" for the christian stance that God exists.

Pah says the Holy Spirit experience is a "placebo" effect. I say if the effect is real and life-changing what difference does it make....we believe in the same basic thing. What he calls "placebo" I call "Holy Spirit". We are mostly separated by sheer definitional differences.

Did George Washington, Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln ever exist. Is it possible in two thousand years the "proof" that these great men existed will be considered as nothing more than legend or myth (there is already alot of speculation on established stories taught in US schools about these three men).

Absolutely! And if that be the case, that all of their evidence is either lost or reduced to legend, then people of the future should absolutely NOT believe in them, because they'd be doing so off of blind faith and foundationless reasoning, which is no good.

Ah, but to cast the stories aside of these three great men and their experiences, whether it is proven they actually happened or not, would result in a tremendous loss as to the inspiration of character and freedom of spirit that these men possessed and projected to others. That is where the letter of the law destroys the spirit of the word.....and damages the moral and inspirational aspects of a human being. People that are truly inspired accomplish great and wonderful things.

1) If you are right and God does not exist you have gained what in life? Being a pessimistic individual with whom the glass is always half-empty?

I personally am not pessimistic. I was actually probably more pessimistically minded as a Christian than I am now.

I recanted and apologized for this blatantly stereotypical statement I made while in an "onery" state of mind in an earlier post! In truth pessisimists are prevalent both in and out of the church world! Once more my humble apologies to you as well Sister Ceridwen!

As far as 'gaining' something in life--I'm not going to make myself believe in god just so I can feel special. In my opinion, it's absolutely impossible to make yourself believe something.

But you are "special" Ceridwen.......and you can put yourself in the position to be open for a possible belief in something......allowing a little extra time for me to "brain-wash" you would be an excellent start!!!

2) If you are wrong and God does exist you could have a problem in the afterlife (not saying you're going to hell you know my belief on that one).

Well, if I'm going to believe in god just so I can cover my bases and get into heaven, I'm gonna have to include Zeus and thor as well, just to be safe.

I guess a fair question to ask would be how many self-professed christians would even go to church at all if there was no reward of "heaven" at stake? Then again sometimes someone can start something for the wrong reasons and end up somewhere different than they at first expected because wrong reasons were eventually replaced with the right ones. I call this the "fake it til you make it" approach to salvation!!!

Then there is the whole issue of the Holy Spirit. If you haven't had an experience with the Holy Spirit it's a no-brainer why you have a hard time with there being a God.

How do you define an experience? Lot's of people have 'experiences' with aliens and midnight abductions, why aren't they taken seriously? Deep feelings don't fly well with me. If I said I had deep feelings that I was Abraham Lincoln, I'd be committed.

Dictionary definition of experience:

1) The apprehension of an object, thought, or emotion through the senses or mind

So if someone has an experience that is in their mind you are saying it's not a true experience??? That doesn't jive so well with the dictionary definition of "experience".

People aren't taken seriously about aliens and and such because proof for this has been sparse and because so many frauds have lent distaste toward potential credible stories. There are options here though:

1) The alien experiences were in their minds

2) They are lying

3) Some of the stories may be true


Whether point one or point three is the case.....an experience is an experience. The real question is did that experience offer any benefit to anyone's growth physically or spiritually? If there is benifit the experience may be worth pursuing. If there is no benefit.....what's the point? I think we may agree here but are arriving at a similar destination via different methods.

Remember, you can't see the wind but can still prove that it exists because of the effects that it has on our surroundings. The Holy Spirit is like the wind, its effects are widespread and far-reaching.

How do you know that these 'widespread effects' are really from the holy spirit, and not just from natural happenings, or even just what people hope for.

Who cares? Benefit is benefit no matter what name you are determined to ascribe to it.

I'm sorry I haven't replied to you earlier--I've skimmed through the convo between you and pah, and I hope I havn't repeated anything

Forgotten, forgiven and understood.......Sister!

 

[Pah]

destinata7:
"Pah says the Holy Spirit experience is a "placebo" effect. I say if the effect is real and life-changing what difference does it make....we believe in the same basic thing. What he calls "placebo" I call "Holy Spirit". We are mostly separated by sheer definitional differences. "

I insuated (not stated it) that they are simular. The meaning behind the insinuation is that they are both figments of the mind. What causes the "cure" in medicine is not the placebo but the mind thinking it has that effect. There is no Holy Ghost but the mind of some are so conditioned to a "real" existence that it doesn't matter and then they falsely claim the Spirit as the cause..

We are not, by the way, separated by definitions on anything but on all of your presumptions including that we are close. You do me a injustice by the mischaracterization.

 

[destinata7]

destinata7:
"Pah says the Holy Spirit experience is a "placebo" effect. I say if the effect is real and life-changing what difference does it make....we believe in the same basic thing. What he calls "placebo" I call "Holy Spirit". We are mostly separated by sheer definitional differences. "

I insuated (not stated it) that they are simular. The meaning behind the insinuation is that they are both figments of the mind. What causes the "cure" in medicine is not the placebo but the mind thinking it has that effect. There is no Holy Ghost but the mind of some are so conditioned to a "real" existence that it doesn't matter and then they falsely claim the Spirit as the cause..

We are not, by the way, separated by definitions on anything but on all of your presumptions including that we are close. You do me a injustice by the mischaracterization.

I very much disagree with you...I think definitions play a huge role in our differences. You're just stubborn because you don't like my approach...I'm rubbing you the wrong way so you are loathe to be associated with me in the manner of belief.

However, I completely agree that the mind plays a major role in the effects and healings of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works through your mind and unleashes the power within you for the healings and such.

That is why acceptance and belief are such an intrical part of healing. The Bible says that the kingdom of heaven is within you!!! It's built in....you just have to learn how to tap into it!! You must allow for the healing to happen or your free will may shut off the "miracle valve" in your mind and/or spirit.

As to mis-quoting you....I never said that you stated they were similar.
If you read very carefully I merely said that you claimed the Holy Spirit effect was a "placebo" effect. I believe that is an accurate statement and really don't see how I have done you "injustice" through "mischaracterization".


PS I noticed that you changed the scriptural "contradictory" quotes attached as your signature! Wise move.....

 

[Pah]

[

PS I noticed that you changed the scriptural "contradictory" quotes attached as your signature! Wise move.....

Do I detect some haughtiness in that remark? It is especially unbecoming after your apologetics. You stated, in error, that in the Commanmdnt, God was "zealous" I showed conclusively that the translation overwhelmingly was "jealous". You also have a poor grasp of who is jealous and who is zealous in Numb 25:11 as translated by the same versions that discredited your attempt at authoritative Hebrew.

The poor apologetics - To wit: "FYI the scripture in Exodus is referring to the lingering genetic and influential instructional effects that can be passed on to one's own children when the progenerator has given himself over to hate. It can take generations to purify these negative effects from the offspring"

On the contrary, the Commanment speaks of God's direct action - He is the cause of the punishment going to the the 3rd and 4th generation because he is jealous. He (God) considers the worship of other gods to be hateful not the worshiper who has other motives.

Your apologetics, based on the wrong actor, mentions genetics. I am not aware of any genetic cause of hate. I do know that hate is learned and taught - nuture in this case - not nature. (or as you say, instructional effects) Hate does not mutate genes.

 

[Ceridwen018]

destinata7,

But do they not keep digging up new fossils all the time of things previously unfound? Look, I could care less about unicorns. My point is that atheists are working off of best guesses as to the supposed non-existence of God. From their best guesses they formulate a "doctrine" of opinion that has no solid proof (of the non-existence of God). Hence they feel that the "probability" according to mis-interpreted scientific data is enough to warrant this stance.

Haha, yes I could care less about unicorns too, but it is a good analogy I think. So yes, it is absolutely possible that a unicorn fossil will be dug up sometime in the future. The point here is, that both god and unicorns have many things in common. Both have no proof to back them up, and both have the potential of being discovered and proven scientifically in the future...the difference comes in the fact that unicorns are disregarded as mythological, and god is accepted as the real deal. In science, everything is fair game, but until it is proven, it is considered obsolete, or at best a theory.

I am interested in this 'mis-interpreted' scietific data, though. Could you cite some stuff for me that I can look up?

Ah, but to cast the stories aside of these three great men and their experiences, whether it is proven they actually happened or not, would result in a tremendous loss as to the inspiration of character and freedom of spirit that these men possessed and projected to others. That is where the letter of the law destroys the spirit of the word.....and damages the moral and inspirational aspects of a human being. People that are truly inspired accomplish great and wonderful things.

Indeed it would be a loss, which is why these 'stories' would probably not be thrown out. We still have Homer's Illiad and Odyssey. We can learn much from these stories, yet they are accepted as myth...perhaps it would be the same with these.

But you are "special" Ceridwen.......and you can put yourself in the position to be open for a possible belief in something......allowing a little extra time for me to "brain-wash" you would be an excellent start!!!

Haha, indeed! I hope I haven't conveyed the idea that I am not open...my motto is 'prove me wrong any day'. I am very interested in others opinions and am always open to other's points of view. just because I'm very questioning doesn't mean that I'm writing something off, I'm just testing it out.

What I meant, is that one cannot force themself to believe in something, and I am sure you agree with this. You believe in god-- you can't just up and up decide one day not to-- it wouldn't work! Your opinions have to be genuinely changed.

People aren't taken seriously about aliens and and such because proof for this has been sparse and because so many frauds have lent distaste toward potential credible stories.

Hmmm...kinda like religion? I don't mean to stereotype with the mention of 'frauds', but there have been frauds in religion, and proof is sparse.

There are options here though:

1) The alien experiences were in their minds

2) They are lying

3) Some of the stories may be true


Whether point one or point three is the case.....an experience is an experience. The real question is did that experience offer any benefit to anyone's growth physically or spiritually? If there is benifit the experience may be worth pursuing. If there is no benefit.....what's the point? I think we may agree here but are arriving at a similar destination via different methods.

Alright then, by defintion of experience, you are right. We need to analyze the differnt types of experiences though. As for mental and spiritual experiences that one may have with the holy spirit, as you mentioned earlier, the question we must ask ourselves, is 'are these credible?' Can these be treated as evidence towards god? I can tell you, there are plenty of people in nut-houses who are subject to a plethora of mental and spiritual 'experiences'. What makes them different from you? (I'm not saying you're a 'nut', I mean your experiences :mrgreen: )

As far as benefit goes, this is a toughy. Mr. Spinkles started a thread called 'What's a heretic to do?', about, is it moral to try and get someone to doubt their faith when it is doing you no harm and them good. I am undecided on this issue...I am a seeker of the truth, but not everyone else is. Many think they have the truth, but are unwilling to discuss it further...I guess, when I'm talking to someone, I leave it up to them to tell me to shut up or not! If they don't want to hear what I have to say, all they have to do is say the word and I'll begrudgingly respect it.

 

[destinata7]

destinata7,

But do they not keep digging up new fossils all the time of things previously unfound? Look, I could care less about unicorns. My point is that atheists are working off of best guesses as to the supposed non-existence of God. From their best guesses they formulate a "doctrine" of opinion that has no solid proof (of the non-existence of God). Hence they feel that the "probability" according to mis-interpreted scientific data is enough to warrant this stance.

Haha, yes I could care less about unicorns too, but it is a good analogy I think. So yes, it is absolutely possible that a unicorn fossil will be dug up sometime in the future. The point here is, that both god and unicorns have many things in common. Both have no proof to back them up, and both have the potential of being discovered and proven scientifically in the future...the difference comes in the fact that unicorns are disregarded as mythological, and god is accepted as the real deal. In science, everything is fair game, but until it is proven, it is considered obsolete, or at best a theory.

I see your angle on this......but there are some major differences between these two topics. Hundreds of millions of people have claimed to had experiences with Jesus, Holy Spirit, God and/or angels. These claimed experiences have been going on for thousands of years! How many people have claimed to had experiences with unicorns? Hundreds? Even thousands maybe? The unicorn topic pales in comparison by strength of sheer numbers alone, not to mention the outstading credibility of some of the people who have claimed to have experiences (Joan of Arc, Abe Lincoln, Martin Luther King, etc....the list is a Who's Who of the world and goes on and on and on). If a huge portion of the population of the world is "nutty".....then maybe nutty is the norm! Or (gasp!) maybe at least a portion of this vast list of people are/were actually telling the truth!

I am interested in this 'mis-interpreted' scietific data, though. Could you cite some stuff for me that I can look up?

I love to talk science...we'll cover some more of this soon!

Ah, but to cast the stories aside of these three great men and their experiences, whether it is proven they actually happened or not, would result in a tremendous loss as to the inspiration of character and freedom of spirit that these men possessed and projected to others. That is where the letter of the law destroys the spirit of the word.....and damages the moral and inspirational aspects of a human being. People that are truly inspired accomplish great and wonderful things.

Indeed it would be a loss, which is why these 'stories' would probably not be thrown out. We still have Homer's Illiad and Odyssey. We can learn much from these stories, yet they are accepted as myth...perhaps it would be the same with these.

If the only benefit someone is receiving is from the inspirational content of the story......does it matter if it physically happened? I heard someone say that "if it's not true in this world, I'm sure it's true in some other world". When a story is "imagined", where does it come from anyway?? Imagination touches the spiritual realm where many truths can be unlocked for humankind. If you think that's so far out, then why did Jesus Himself make up stories/parables to express concepts that would benefit many, many people? The parables of Jesus are treated with the same kind of respect and value as the "real" stories in the Bible!! And in some cases even more so....

Haha, indeed! I hope I haven't conveyed the idea that I am not open...my motto is 'prove me wrong any day'. I am very interested in others opinions and am always open to other's points of view. just because I'm very questioning doesn't mean that I'm writing something off, I'm just testing it out.

What I meant, is that one cannot force themself to believe in something, and I am sure you agree with this. You believe in god-- you can't just up and up decide one day not to-- it wouldn't work! Your opinions have to be genuinely changed.

I know what you meant and I was making an effort to be humorous, not trying to imply that you were close-minded. I know where you're coming from about forcing belief. Something has to "click" inside you to truly change a point of view.

People aren't taken seriously about aliens and and such because proof for this has been sparse and because so many frauds have lent distaste toward potential credible stories.

Hmmm...kinda like religion? I don't mean to stereotype with the mention of 'frauds', but there have been frauds in religion, and proof is sparse.

I agree.....but there have been frauds in science, inventions, government and banking and that doesn't stop you from your participation in any of those things.

I think what's missing here Ceridwen, is that you seem to be hung up on the tangible. There are things in this world that are proven to exist that are intangible: Love, hate, kindness, depression, dreams, ideas, etc....
Why are these things proven to exist? Because people have experienced them and conveyed this to others.....(gasp!) and people actually believed them! But you would say that many ot the intangibles I listed can be physically demonstrated or expressed. I say, so can the love of God and the messages of freedom that are conveyed to us through AM's love and mercy.

Alright then, by defintion of experience, you are right. We need to analyze the differnt types of experiences though. As for mental and spiritual experiences that one may have with the holy spirit, as you mentioned earlier, the question we must ask ourselves, is 'are these credible?' Can these be treated as evidence towards god? I can tell you, there are plenty of people in nut-houses who are subject to a plethora of mental and spiritual 'experiences'. What makes them different from you? (I'm not saying you're a 'nut', I mean your experiences :mrgreen: )

You are unintentionally stereo-typing the occupants of "nut-houses". And if it isn't a textbook stereo-type it definitely misses a couple of small points:

1) There are people in "nut-houses" who believe in science....uh-oh better throw away all of your science books now!

2) There are psychiatrists that have ended up in "nut-houses".....now you have to abandon all of psychiatry and empty the "nut-houses"?

3) If someone else is in a psycho-ward that is an atheist with a passion for science.....how are they different from you? (no offense, but it is an honest question)

4) There are more than enough people with spiritual experiences that definitely do not belong in any mental institution.


You see the complications that your implications cause when further extended?

As far as benefit goes, this is a toughy. Mr. Spinkles started a thread called 'What's a heretic to do?', about, is it moral to try and get someone to doubt their faith when it is doing you no harm and them good. I am undecided on this issue...I am a seeker of the truth, but not everyone else is. Many think they have the truth, but are unwilling to discuss it further...I guess, when I'm talking to someone, I leave it up to them to tell me to shut up or not! If they don't want to hear what I have to say, all they have to do is say the word and I'll begrudgingly respect it.

Anyone willing to stick out their neck on a forum such as this one is either unsatisfied and looking for alternative viewpoints or pursuaded in their own beliefs and anxious to get out there and enlighten others to their beliefs........either way this opens them up as "fair game"! Whether searching or proselyting, both must be prepared to hear the opinions of others. Should people be sharing out of the spirit of love more than a need to be right? Absolutely! In a perfect world this would be the case every time. Here on earth, we can try for perfection by doing our best for each other. Sometimes we get carried away, but we are human beings......I think.