No, I don't know. Neither do you. The difference is that you believe you possess truth, while I believe everything in a human's consciousness is, and can only be, belief. Your "God informing you" is, to me, completely indistinguishable from your hallucinating, and I challenge you provide a way to demonstrate to me …
No, I don't know. Neither do you. The difference is that you believe you possess truth, while I believe everything in a human's consciousness is, and can only be, belief. Your "God informing you" is, to me, completely indistinguishable from your hallucinating, and I challenge you provide a way to demonstrate to me otherwise. Highly problematic when one wants to spread "Good News" to skeptics.
More generally, my stock reply (ordinarily, just to myself) to literally anything someone tells me -- "revealed" religion or not -- is "WWIBT?" or "Why Would I Believe That?" I have learned well over many decades, especially in the [post]modern West, to have less than zero *automatic* respect for "experts", who are more often than not simply feral political animals who are primarily Aristotelian ethos-hucksters, whatever else they do in life. That goes double for godmongers of all kinds. I find it very useful in keeping my mind open to what evidence and possibilities are plausible and which are not.
If you don't know, you also don't know whether I know.
I suppose you think you came from an explosion of gases. Or maybe you'd admit you don't know that either.
Faith isn't airy fairy imaginations. It's the evidence of things not seen. So you're not going to know with your native senses. However there's more to life than those, much more.
The truth is, you think you know a lot because you're relying on your carnal, non-spiritual senses, so there's no point in trying to argue with someone so limited and self-contradictory, and I'm not.
I can wait for you to find out. Not a problem at all.
"If you don't know, you also don't know whether I know."
Correct. I did not deny that. But it is not relevant to my belief or not in God. Please read again, carefully: "Your 'God informing you' is, to me, completely indistinguishable from your hallucinating, and I challenge you provide a way to demonstrate to me otherwise. "
"The truth is, you think you know a lot ..."
False. I know nothing; I only believe. Here, I'm simply challenging *your* beliefs with *my* beliefs. I believe there is much of my beliefs that you're assuming, and others you're just not getting. I'll happily confess some of that is doubtless my own lack of clarity in places.
"... because you're relying on your carnal, non-spiritual senses,"
If the alleged reality of this cannot be systematically *transferred* from a believer to a receiving skeptic (because of missing "senses"), it's useless to the receiver. At least for much of science, limited as it is, can widely be transferred to, and then tested by, a theory's skeptic, limited only by the receiver's ability to understand its complexity, not to "sense" it. So, as far as I can see, and in this late stage in life, either (in the words of a Steve Martin '70s skit), regarding religion, either you're "feelin' it" (to me, i.e. the apparent God hallucination), or not.
"I suppose you think you came from an explosion of gases. ... [etc. etc.] "
It is not important to me where I believe I came from. It is ultimately unknowable to any human being how that belief and many others work. What we perceive about the entire universe could be a massively complex illusion. We can forever hunt for evidence whether I came from a "Big Bang" or anything else, and it's entertaining and useful (within a frame of reference), but ultimately forever unsettled.
I am able to sit with the void of that lack of knowledge. Most amazing to me, however, is the tendency of most humans to be utterly incapable of accepting their not being able to know something. They especially cannot accept that some things may be unavoidably unknowable by *any* humans, smart and/or educated about whatever. That lack of comfort drives them crazy, until they latch onto some kind of belief-rock. But as I said earlier, *nothing* is knowable -- it's *all* belief. It's in the nature of all humans. I'm now convinced this emotional weakness we humans have is at the heart of humans' need to stuff a God/gods into their heads.
But it's not the only dimension of pretension. Most relevantly and importantly today, is it also behind the need to stuff their heads with certainty about which (major) political "side" is factually correct and morally "correct", when it is entirely plausible that both are. IMO, because both Right (simplistically put, for brevity: prioritizing individuality/freedom) and Left (prioritizing society/fairness) are "correct", they exist as political forces in perpetuity (although each instantiation is usually heavily distorted by the forces in each context). Once we drop that pretension and regain our humility, accepting that everyone possesses (human) truths, we may be able to get back to functioning politics again. The same thing applies to pretentions about divinity or lack thereof.
I didn't know, admitted it, asked God to show me, and He did (this was 48 years ago and has continued to this day). Admittedly, I asked by faith, which is a gift from God. He gives to whom He wills when He wills. He's in charge.
As for your condition, it's caused by what the Bible calls "sin," a word many are not familiar with its actual meaning. You're eating from and relying on the Tree of Knowledge, being your own god, and you call your knowledge "beliefs."
You won't see or know God till you eat from the Tree of Life.
You are also responsible for your condition, which is a good thing for you. It's how you'll come out of that darkness when your time of repentance and faith arrive. And they will. Every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord - readily with great peace and joy.
Only our Creator can, has, and will accomplish this. I am a witness.
"For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Hab 2:14).
"For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Hab 2:14)."
LOL.....just a CLAIM scribbled down by unknow ignorant goat herders two centuries ago. With no evidence. Anonymous undated ancient writings. Sounds like a solid foundation for basing your life on!
The Bible only makes claims. The Bible is not evidence.
Why is it so hard for people to understand that "My book is true because my book says it is true" is not a valid form of reasoning?
Why do a Christian expect a book written by unknown authors in a variety of languages, that was translated, rewritten, edited countless times ~ is evidence for anything?
It's just a book.
Every statement of "Jesus says" needs to start with "my old book says Jesus says...."
If, instead, you could believe that alien (non-infinite, non-"loving") intelligence(s) is/are behind the origins (and maybe continuance) of the Abrahamic God -- *that* is something I can find plausible.
Now you've circled back to square one. Again, you believe what, to a skeptic, is indistinguishable from a hallucination. You didn't address it the first time, so I must assume its import whooshed over your head.
"You're eating from and relying on the Tree of Knowledge, being your own god, and you call your knowledge 'beliefs.' "
Again, I make no such claim to being a god. Quite the opposite. As I said above: "I know nothing; I only believe. Here, I'm simply challenging *your* beliefs with *my* beliefs." I say only that in the obvious absence of such a creature as God, I take matters into my own hands. You're right only about the pro-active part of my beliefs -- but nothing else about my attitude.
"If the alleged reality of this cannot be systematically *transferred* from a believer to a receiving skeptic (because of missing "senses"), it's useless to the receiver."
I should add that this failure to receive (due to missing senses) also makes the receiver *unaccountable* to the alleged God the godmonger asserts. So much for pistol-whipping many of the thinking non-believers into compliance post-Enlightenment, the way it had been done successfully prior to that time.
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son ... "
The entire premise that there is some great "loss" to the all-powerful creator of the universe, one that binds people to "owe" him or otherwise pay the price, is simply insane. Yet I understand it is the most quoted Biblical phrase. Who knew he was such a bean-counter? It conjures up those pagan gods always looking for human sacrifices to throw into the fire pit.
As Hume pointed out (thru a dialog character), "It is an absurdity to believe that the Deity has human passions, and one of the lowest of human passions, a restless appetite for applause”
It's also preposterous that many Christians seem to be awed by mid-second-millennium English. As if it has magical powers to sound like "God's voice", rather than being completely an accident of time and place, and a translation to boot.
"He is Real, you know."
No, I don't know. Neither do you. The difference is that you believe you possess truth, while I believe everything in a human's consciousness is, and can only be, belief. Your "God informing you" is, to me, completely indistinguishable from your hallucinating, and I challenge you provide a way to demonstrate to me otherwise. Highly problematic when one wants to spread "Good News" to skeptics.
More generally, my stock reply (ordinarily, just to myself) to literally anything someone tells me -- "revealed" religion or not -- is "WWIBT?" or "Why Would I Believe That?" I have learned well over many decades, especially in the [post]modern West, to have less than zero *automatic* respect for "experts", who are more often than not simply feral political animals who are primarily Aristotelian ethos-hucksters, whatever else they do in life. That goes double for godmongers of all kinds. I find it very useful in keeping my mind open to what evidence and possibilities are plausible and which are not.
If you don't know, you also don't know whether I know.
I suppose you think you came from an explosion of gases. Or maybe you'd admit you don't know that either.
Faith isn't airy fairy imaginations. It's the evidence of things not seen. So you're not going to know with your native senses. However there's more to life than those, much more.
The truth is, you think you know a lot because you're relying on your carnal, non-spiritual senses, so there's no point in trying to argue with someone so limited and self-contradictory, and I'm not.
I can wait for you to find out. Not a problem at all.
I suppose you think you came out of a magic Sky Daddies finger....ABracadabra. Shazaam.
It's impossible to argue from logic when your opponent basically claims "MAGIC."
They never lose a debate in their minds.
These are the ones who say their God is unknowable and then proceed to tell us what all we need to know about their God.
Imagine what goes on in these people’s heads.
It’s amazing to me how people can believe these religious stories that play over and over in their imaginations.
It’s mental illness. How do they function in the real world?
The depth of their delusions and their grip it has on their mind is terrifying.
I just hope they have someone caring for their well-being.
"If you don't know, you also don't know whether I know."
Correct. I did not deny that. But it is not relevant to my belief or not in God. Please read again, carefully: "Your 'God informing you' is, to me, completely indistinguishable from your hallucinating, and I challenge you provide a way to demonstrate to me otherwise. "
"The truth is, you think you know a lot ..."
False. I know nothing; I only believe. Here, I'm simply challenging *your* beliefs with *my* beliefs. I believe there is much of my beliefs that you're assuming, and others you're just not getting. I'll happily confess some of that is doubtless my own lack of clarity in places.
"... because you're relying on your carnal, non-spiritual senses,"
If the alleged reality of this cannot be systematically *transferred* from a believer to a receiving skeptic (because of missing "senses"), it's useless to the receiver. At least for much of science, limited as it is, can widely be transferred to, and then tested by, a theory's skeptic, limited only by the receiver's ability to understand its complexity, not to "sense" it. So, as far as I can see, and in this late stage in life, either (in the words of a Steve Martin '70s skit), regarding religion, either you're "feelin' it" (to me, i.e. the apparent God hallucination), or not.
"I suppose you think you came from an explosion of gases. ... [etc. etc.] "
It is not important to me where I believe I came from. It is ultimately unknowable to any human being how that belief and many others work. What we perceive about the entire universe could be a massively complex illusion. We can forever hunt for evidence whether I came from a "Big Bang" or anything else, and it's entertaining and useful (within a frame of reference), but ultimately forever unsettled.
I am able to sit with the void of that lack of knowledge. Most amazing to me, however, is the tendency of most humans to be utterly incapable of accepting their not being able to know something. They especially cannot accept that some things may be unavoidably unknowable by *any* humans, smart and/or educated about whatever. That lack of comfort drives them crazy, until they latch onto some kind of belief-rock. But as I said earlier, *nothing* is knowable -- it's *all* belief. It's in the nature of all humans. I'm now convinced this emotional weakness we humans have is at the heart of humans' need to stuff a God/gods into their heads.
But it's not the only dimension of pretension. Most relevantly and importantly today, is it also behind the need to stuff their heads with certainty about which (major) political "side" is factually correct and morally "correct", when it is entirely plausible that both are. IMO, because both Right (simplistically put, for brevity: prioritizing individuality/freedom) and Left (prioritizing society/fairness) are "correct", they exist as political forces in perpetuity (although each instantiation is usually heavily distorted by the forces in each context). Once we drop that pretension and regain our humility, accepting that everyone possesses (human) truths, we may be able to get back to functioning politics again. The same thing applies to pretentions about divinity or lack thereof.
I didn't know, admitted it, asked God to show me, and He did (this was 48 years ago and has continued to this day). Admittedly, I asked by faith, which is a gift from God. He gives to whom He wills when He wills. He's in charge.
As for your condition, it's caused by what the Bible calls "sin," a word many are not familiar with its actual meaning. You're eating from and relying on the Tree of Knowledge, being your own god, and you call your knowledge "beliefs."
You won't see or know God till you eat from the Tree of Life.
You are also responsible for your condition, which is a good thing for you. It's how you'll come out of that darkness when your time of repentance and faith arrive. And they will. Every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord - readily with great peace and joy.
Only our Creator can, has, and will accomplish this. I am a witness.
"For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Hab 2:14).
"For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Hab 2:14)."
LOL.....just a CLAIM scribbled down by unknow ignorant goat herders two centuries ago. With no evidence. Anonymous undated ancient writings. Sounds like a solid foundation for basing your life on!
The Bible only makes claims. The Bible is not evidence.
Why is it so hard for people to understand that "My book is true because my book says it is true" is not a valid form of reasoning?
Why do a Christian expect a book written by unknown authors in a variety of languages, that was translated, rewritten, edited countless times ~ is evidence for anything?
It's just a book.
Every statement of "Jesus says" needs to start with "my old book says Jesus says...."
If, instead, you could believe that alien (non-infinite, non-"loving") intelligence(s) is/are behind the origins (and maybe continuance) of the Abrahamic God -- *that* is something I can find plausible.
"[I] asked God to show me, and He did"
Now you've circled back to square one. Again, you believe what, to a skeptic, is indistinguishable from a hallucination. You didn't address it the first time, so I must assume its import whooshed over your head.
"You're eating from and relying on the Tree of Knowledge, being your own god, and you call your knowledge 'beliefs.' "
Again, I make no such claim to being a god. Quite the opposite. As I said above: "I know nothing; I only believe. Here, I'm simply challenging *your* beliefs with *my* beliefs." I say only that in the obvious absence of such a creature as God, I take matters into my own hands. You're right only about the pro-active part of my beliefs -- but nothing else about my attitude.
"If the alleged reality of this cannot be systematically *transferred* from a believer to a receiving skeptic (because of missing "senses"), it's useless to the receiver."
I should add that this failure to receive (due to missing senses) also makes the receiver *unaccountable* to the alleged God the godmonger asserts. So much for pistol-whipping many of the thinking non-believers into compliance post-Enlightenment, the way it had been done successfully prior to that time.
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son for part of a weekend."
“For all addicted religious person who lights a candle for me, then verily it shall be immediately bloweth out by me.
I didn't ask for your candle to be lit for me.
I don't want it.
I don't need it.
Please have your Candle back thank you very much.” – the great atheist Cristopher Hitchens
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son ... "
The entire premise that there is some great "loss" to the all-powerful creator of the universe, one that binds people to "owe" him or otherwise pay the price, is simply insane. Yet I understand it is the most quoted Biblical phrase. Who knew he was such a bean-counter? It conjures up those pagan gods always looking for human sacrifices to throw into the fire pit.
As Hume pointed out (thru a dialog character), "It is an absurdity to believe that the Deity has human passions, and one of the lowest of human passions, a restless appetite for applause”
Re thee, thou, [verb]-eth, verily, etc.
It's also preposterous that many Christians seem to be awed by mid-second-millennium English. As if it has magical powers to sound like "God's voice", rather than being completely an accident of time and place, and a translation to boot.