Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 6 votes

2+2=4 equates a certainty of god


  • Please log in to reply
1114 replies to this topic

#796    Dr. D

Dr. D

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,275 posts
  • Joined:15 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico

  • I love being me even though sometimes I'm still a stranger.

Posted 04 August 2008 - 11:36 PM

Tangerine Sheri on Aug 4 2008, 11:02 PM, said:

copasetic doesn't  advcocate picking  on others  , he happens to be my freind and he would  be  seeking to  help one learn in any way he could .. those  in intellegensia have a code of behaviior they   do  not  berate or belittle another and call themsleves an expert they seek to  bridge the gap  find a way to come  together in understanding perhaps you have misunderstood copasetic....


Risking enraging Jo-rel all the more, I will challenge his claim of being an "expert" on the Bible.  I maintain that there are no experts . . . . only varying degrees of ignorance.

Throughout centuries the book has been studied, altered, translated, suffered insertions and forgeries, deletions and spurious interpretations and while the apologist will insist that its central theme has remained intact, its references to historic places and events cannot no longer be considered reliable.  Some even say that you could remove every other verse and the theme would continue to be consistent . . . . but that is like saying that if I removed every other scene from the Wizard of Oz, I would still know that it's about a little girl, her dog and some very strange looking characters.

Unfortunately, modern "experts" appear to be little more than those who offer the most extensive interpretations or exegesis.  This is done through a circular pseudo-academic system of supporting one scripture with another until a network of verses serves as self-justification created for particular Biblical scenes that are usually the most controversial.  In theological circles this is considered scholarship but the same process in any other field of serious research would find the system wanting and too dependant upon human opinion and perception to be wholly valid.

The frailty of theological scholalrship is testified by the influence that the Dionysian manuscripts had on Christian thought for centuries.  Some Bible colleges and seminaries still teach that angels are classified as Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Archangels, Virtues, Powers, Thrones, Principalities and Dominations even though this information originated from a completely fraudulent source.

Some, like Wellhausen and Noth have attempted to reconstruct Biblical history by combining scripture with known historical data and with little success.  The applied researcher, however, should have mastery of Hebrew, Aramaic, Akkadian and Greek - backed up by Latin and German.  Very few do even though the same languages are demanded of those who work deciphering museum manuscripts or any research into comparitive cultures.

One of the first clues we have about Biblical expertise is when someone offers, "The Bible says . . . ."  The Bible doesn't say anything.  Less than 2,000 years ago writings were formed from contrasting cultures and beliefs, alphabets and tongues and represented multiple interests . . . . some noble some personal.  Once collected into a composite form, it remained fragmentary in nature and remains so today as it fails to provide a smooth, fluid flow of language or meaning.  It is nothing more than a collection of thoughts and stories given a name that from the German merely means "library."  And that is what it is . . . . a library of diverse writings about a somewhat singular theme.

Being "expert" is further thwarted by the confession by most translators that portions of syntaxes of the languages remain a mystery that has yet to be solved.  Many portions of the book have "supposed translations" and it has been impossible to determine what influence on the meaning of the text could be credited to local dialects of where originals had been written.

Most of the time when we hear about "study" and "understanding," we are being subjected to some rather one dimensional views of Scripture without the benefit of the lost contexts they may have once held.

So it is . . . . a book held sacred by some and silly by others . . . . but again, containing portions deserving my respect . . . . but portions that simply do not.






#797    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,736 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" (Freud )

Posted 04 August 2008 - 11:43 PM

Jor-el on Aug 4 2008, 04:26 PM, said:

no.gif

Jorel, this is  one of your posts on Adam and and Eve.. which  genesis 1-11 in academic circles these are anceint sumerian creation stories  there wasn't really an adam and eve . secondly a narrative is  made up. just  like a fairy tale or fantasy story  etc....i know you know this  .....

so you see you also  take things literal  .....

Jorel quotes:


"This is not a problem because it just means that many of our ancestors were unable to pass their DNA to future generations since those generations died for one reason or another, leaving our common genetic ancestors as the Genetic Adam and Eve.

This doesn'r mean that there wasn't a physical Adam and Eve to begin with, it just means that our origins are much more ancient than people even scientists think. thumbsup.gif "

Edited by Tangerine Sheri, 04 August 2008 - 11:50 PM.




#798    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,736 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" (Freud )

Posted 04 August 2008 - 11:50 PM

Dr. D on Aug 4 2008, 04:36 PM, said:

Risking enraging Jo-rel all the more, I will challenge his claim of being an "expert" on the Bible.  I maintain that there are no experts . . . . only varying degrees of ignorance.

Throughout centuries the book has been studied, altered, translated, suffered insertions and forgeries, deletions and spurious interpretations and while the apologist will insist that its central theme has remained intact, its references to historic places and events cannot no longer be considered reliable.  Some even say that you could remove every other verse and the theme would continue to be consistent . . . . but that is like saying that if I removed every other scene from the Wizard of Oz, I would still know that it's about a little girl, her dog and some very strange looking characters.

Unfortunately, modern "experts" appear to be little more than those who offer the most extensive interpretations or exegesis.  This is done through a circular pseudo-academic system of supporting one scripture with another until a network of verses serves as self-justification created for particular Biblical scenes that are usually the most controversial.  In theological circles this is considered scholarship but the same process in any other field of serious research would find the system wanting and too dependant upon human opinion and perception to be wholly valid.

The frailty of theological scholalrship is testified by the influence that the Dionysian manuscripts had on Christian thought for centuries.  Some Bible colleges and seminaries still teach that angels are classified as Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Archangels, Virtues, Powers, Thrones, Principalities and Dominations even though this information originated from a completely fraudulent source.

Some, like Wellhausen and Noth have attempted to reconstruct Biblical history by combining scripture with known historical data and with little success.  The applied researcher, however, should have mastery of Hebrew, Aramaic, Akkadian and Greek - backed up by Latin and German.  Very few do even though the same languages are demanded of those who work deciphering museum manuscripts or any research into comparitive cultures.

One of the first clues we have about Biblical expertise is when someone offers, "The Bible says . . . ."  The Bible doesn't say anything.  Less than 2,000 years ago writings were formed from contrasting cultures and beliefs, alphabets and tongues and represented multiple interests . . . . some noble some personal.  Once collected into a composite form, it remained fragmentary in nature and remains so today as it fails to provide a smooth, fluid flow of language or meaning.  It is nothing more than a collection of thoughts and stories given a name that from the German merely means "library."  And that is what it is . . . . a library of diverse writings about a somewhat singular theme.

Being "expert" is further thwarted by the confession by most translators that portions of syntaxes of the languages remain a mystery that has yet to be solved.  Many portions of the book have "supposed translations" and it has been impossible to determine what influence on the meaning of the text could be credited to local dialects of where originals had been written.

Most of the time when we hear about "study" and "understanding," we are being subjected to some rather one dimensional views of Scripture without the benefit of the lost contexts they may have once held.

So it is . . . . a book held sacred by some and silly by others . . . . but again, containing portions deserving my respect . . . . but portions that simply do not.



i concur just  iin the time  i have  studied biblical anything what you write rings true...

touting expertise of a biblical nature  is a slippery slope in my world.....sort of like i stay away from  absolutes  for all the reasons this thread is illuminating....

Edited by Tangerine Sheri, 05 August 2008 - 12:03 AM.




#799    Marcus Aurelius

Marcus Aurelius

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,738 posts
  • Joined:07 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:columbus ohio

Posted 04 August 2008 - 11:55 PM

Once again, for the most part I agree with what Meatloaf has been saying in what seems to be a thread with two different debates going on at once.


I said: "Well, exactly. I've been a paranormal investigator for several years now. I've gotten numerous evp's over the years, but that's not even the half of it. I've experienced MANY things over the years, and gotten very solid evidence, evidence that I cannot explain away by any rational means, and believe me, I go in as a skeptic, I think 80% of places that report activity are not haunted....but man, that 20%........I could tell you so many stories. And to the guy who said all evp's are recorded at low quality is absolutely false. The recorders I use, as the rest of the group I'm involved with, all use ultra high quality ones, and we also use good audio software too....to make damn sure what we capture is truly an evp.

After doing this for so long, to me, it is a logical conclusion that something does survive bodily death. Of that, I have no doubt,"

When I say I have reached the conclusion that something survives bodily death, I mean just that. This is not a matter of faith at all. And to say that all I have is personal experiences to back this up, like a door slamming in another room, for example, is a gross understatement, and a forgone conclusion based entirely upon false assumptions of a person you don't even know. You can attempt to drag it down to that level, if you wish, but it is simply not the case. In our archives is over a decades worth of evidence far beyond 'did you hear that?' kind of nonsense. And as far as converting skeptics? Believe me, buddy, it has. Typically when you do a private investigation for a client, there is usually at least one family member who does not believe in the phenomena being reported, and sometimes, will even be angry that we are there. I've seen quite a few of these people do an about face, shocked by things that they were shown. People can go from diehard skeptics who are even furious you're there to believers in a heartbeat. But again, this is another assumption made based off of ignorance, for any idiot can watch an episode of Ghost Hunters and think they know all there is to know about the paranormal and parapsychology. I was doing this before the sci fi channel made it popular, let me tell you.

And I find it funny how diehard skeptics like so many on here will try to paste any other alternative explanation, or just throw the evidence out entirely, because they do not want to accept that there are things outside of the small little world you call the self. Oh the recorder is low quality. Ha. Give me a break. You people have no idea what the hell you're talking about. Sure, you look for a rational explanation first; believe me, its better to tell a client there home probably ISN'T haunted. You analyze and reanalyze. You make damn sure. And sometimes you are left with something that has no 'logical' explanation.

You want to throw out decades of research into parapsychology, starting in the 1800s? What? It's all s**t? Well, I guess that's a pretty easy statement to make when you know nothing about the subject, except what you see on tv shows.

Nothing to prove it? I have plenty.

Regarding the faith part, let me spell it out for you.

1.Evidence, logical based conclusion there is life beyond death. This is the truth, if some don't believe it, I couldn't care less.
2. Personal Experiences, next, these are things that have led me to believe what I believe about what happens to us beyond death. Others, like me, and before me, have shared in these experiences. So to me, this is evidence, to the skeptic, its faith. Because you throw out or dismiss this kind of evidence, you say the believers take it in blind faith. I don't. I believe in my experiences, and I believe in the experience of others. To me, this is a logical conclusion. To you, it is an act of faith. Call it whatever you like, or judge me however you wish, I simply don't care.
3. Lastly, then, is God Himself. Point 1 and point 2 lead me to believe that He in turn exists. THIS I TAKE BY FAITH. While points 1 and 2 point to this fact, no, I cannot prove beyond any shaodow of doubt that God exists. So yes, this is where the faith kicks in. Here and here alone.

See, I believe, overall what I believe very logically and matter of fact. Problem is here, Urban, is we view the evidence differently. You dismiss it out of hand, I believe it. Hence our 2 very different positions. I don't doubt the first 2 points at all, or even the 3rd, for that matter. But I'll readily admit to taking the 3rd position by faith. And why do you call faith ignorance when you have none? It is clearly a subject you don't understand from a believers standpoint. Tell a priest or a Buddhist Monk he is ignorant. I'm sure they will disagree with such a crass statement.

you said: "but until then disbelief in God is justified."

I never said that it wasn't. I both understand and respect your position. Is it too much to ask for the same courtesy? Most people who know me on here know that I am respectful to the beliefs of others, whether its an atheist, a fundamentalist or a satanist. Everyone has their own distinct path in life. It is not my wish to challenge or hinder those on those paths. I come on here and state my opinions, that is all. You're not going to sway me, and I'm not going to sway you. That's the way it is.

"To discount personal experiences is absurd. People who experience God are simply witnesses and their stories cannot be excluded. If the existence of God were to be evaluated in a court, those believing in God and other spiritual beings would have millions of witnesses, the Universe, Ghost images, and EVPs as evidence."

True enough. But it is easier for the skeptic to dismiss something outside the realm of normal possibility. You could have an honest to God full bodied apparition walk into the courtroom, and they would still try to dismiss it.....oh it was a projector image....or something. I think the only thing that could sway these people is if God Himself appeared in the clouds and said HERE I AM.
But such would be weakness, rather it is a strength to believe in faith, but to them, that is an alien concept.

"no im not, and neither are. its just a theory you and others have. we got here from evolution. thats how we evolved to what we are today, and why we show these traits. these emotions. our weaknesses. our stupidity."

Mulder, you don't seem much like your namesake. He was a believer in the paranormal lol. Now, this statement........are you serious? You think that our emotions are weakness and stupidity? Wow. I don't know what to say to that. So if you were in a burning building with others in it, then, and you saw their suffering, you'd think to yourself, ah, this stupid emotion makes me want to go save them? No thanks. You call things like compassion weakness? unsure.gif

Better off to be savages then, eh? Total law of the jungle?






Posted Image

The Urban Contemplative

http://www.unexplain...log&blogid=2565

#800    churchanddestroy

churchanddestroy

    Secretary of No State

  • Member
  • 3,088 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

Posted 04 August 2008 - 11:58 PM

Jor-el on Aug 4 2008, 05:53 PM, said:

Then again how many of those christians actually bother to study the bible as well, but they are "christians"... and no I'm not relooking at my construct, I'm just fed up as any person has got a right to be in when he sees people speaking of things they haven't got the foggiest notion of.

So wait, now you know what the correct interpretation of the Bible is? More arrogance.

When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon.

#801    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,736 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" (Freud )

Posted 05 August 2008 - 12:32 AM

brahman1888 on Aug 4 2008, 04:55 PM, said:

Once again, for the most part I agree with what Meatloaf has been saying in what seems to be a thread with two different debates going on at once.


I said: "Well, exactly. I've been a paranormal investigator for several years now. I've gotten numerous evp's over the years, but that's not even the half of it. I've experienced MANY things over the years, and gotten very solid evidence, evidence that I cannot explain away by any rational means, and believe me, I go in as a skeptic, I think 80% of places that report activity are not haunted....but man, that 20%........I could tell you so many stories. And to the guy who said all evp's are recorded at low quality is absolutely false. The recorders I use, as the rest of the group I'm involved with, all use ultra high quality ones, and we also use good audio software too....to make damn sure what we capture is truly an evp.

After doing this for so long, to me, it is a logical conclusion that something does survive bodily death. Of that, I have no doubt,"

When I say I have reached the conclusion that something survives bodily death, I mean just that. This is not a matter of faith at all. And to say that all I have is personal experiences to back this up, like a door slamming in another room, for example, is a gross understatement, and a forgone conclusion based entirely upon false assumptions of a person you don't even know. You can attempt to drag it down to that level, if you wish, but it is simply not the case. In our archives is over a decades worth of evidence far beyond 'did you hear that?' kind of nonsense. And as far as converting skeptics? Believe me, buddy, it has. Typically when you do a private investigation for a client, there is usually at least one family member who does not believe in the phenomena being reported, and sometimes, will even be angry that we are there. I've seen quite a few of these people do an about face, shocked by things that they were shown. People can go from diehard skeptics who are even furious you're there to believers in a heartbeat. But again, this is another assumption made based off of ignorance, for any idiot can watch an episode of Ghost Hunters and think they know all there is to know about the paranormal and parapsychology. I was doing this before the sci fi channel made it popular, let me tell you.

And I find it funny how diehard skeptics like so many on here will try to paste any other alternative explanation, or just throw the evidence out entirely, because they do not want to accept that there are things outside of the small little world you call the self. Oh the recorder is low quality. Ha. Give me a break. You people have no idea what the hell you're talking about. Sure, you look for a rational explanation first; believe me, its better to tell a client there home probably ISN'T haunted. You analyze and reanalyze. You make damn sure. And sometimes you are left with something that has no 'logical' explanation.

You want to throw out decades of research into parapsychology, starting in the 1800s? What? It's all s**t? Well, I guess that's a pretty easy statement to make when you know nothing about the subject, except what you see on tv shows.

Nothing to prove it? I have plenty.

Regarding the faith part, let me spell it out for you.

1.Evidence, logical based conclusion there is life beyond death. This is the truth, if some don't believe it, I couldn't care less.
2. Personal Experiences, next, these are things that have led me to believe what I believe about what happens to us beyond death. Others, like me, and before me, have shared in these experiences. So to me, this is evidence, to the skeptic, its faith. Because you throw out or dismiss this kind of evidence, you say the believers take it in blind faith. I don't. I believe in my experiences, and I believe in the experience of others. To me, this is a logical conclusion. To you, it is an act of faith. Call it whatever you like, or judge me however you wish, I simply don't care.
3. Lastly, then, is God Himself. Point 1 and point 2 lead me to believe that He in turn exists. THIS I TAKE BY FAITH. While points 1 and 2 point to this fact, no, I cannot prove beyond any shaodow of doubt that God exists. So yes, this is where the faith kicks in. Here and here alone.

See, I believe, overall what I believe very logically and matter of fact. Problem is here, Urban, is we view the evidence differently. You dismiss it out of hand, I believe it. Hence our 2 very different positions. I don't doubt the first 2 points at all, or even the 3rd, for that matter. But I'll readily admit to taking the 3rd position by faith. And why do you call faith ignorance when you have none? It is clearly a subject you don't understand from a believers standpoint. Tell a priest or a Buddhist Monk he is ignorant. I'm sure they will disagree with such a crass statement.

you said: "but until then disbelief in God is justified."

I never said that it wasn't. I both understand and respect your position. Is it too much to ask for the same courtesy? Most people who know me on here know that I am respectful to the beliefs of others, whether its an atheist, a fundamentalist or a satanist. Everyone has their own distinct path in life. It is not my wish to challenge or hinder those on those paths. I come on here and state my opinions, that is all. You're not going to sway me, and I'm not going to sway you. That's the way it is.

"To discount personal experiences is absurd. People who experience God are simply witnesses and their stories cannot be excluded. If the existence of God were to be evaluated in a court, those believing in God and other spiritual beings would have millions of witnesses, the Universe, Ghost images, and EVPs as evidence."

True enough. But it is easier for the skeptic to dismiss something outside the realm of normal possibility. You could have an honest to God full bodied apparition walk into the courtroom, and they would still try to dismiss it.....oh it was a projector image....or something. I think the only thing that could sway these people is if God Himself appeared in the clouds and said HERE I AM.
But such would be weakness, rather it is a strength to believe in faith, but to them, that is an alien concept.

"no im not, and neither are. its just a theory you and others have. we got here from evolution. thats how we evolved to what we are today, and why we show these traits. these emotions. our weaknesses. our stupidity."

Mulder, you don't seem much like your namesake. He was a believer in the paranormal lol. Now, this statement........are you serious? You think that our emotions are weakness and stupidity? Wow. I don't know what to say to that. So if you were in a burning building with others in it, then, and you saw their suffering, you'd think to yourself, ah, this stupid emotion makes me want to go save them? No thanks. You call things like compassion weakness? unsure.gif

Better off to be savages then, eh? Total law of the jungle?

brahman you are saying very specifically certain things you know for sure are based on personal  experience ....subjective exeprince is limited on what it can conclude.....
personal  experince helps you in the daily grind  or career choices  but its not collective  fact....

i wonder  if you are understanding open minded  to  mean  beleif  in any ole thing........

tooth fairy kool , pink elephants  rock on..

the difference  is that   when some  say anything is possible they leave it at that they dont  make up stuff to fill in the blanks ( a natural aspect of the brain by the way) if you have little  kids you will  know   how this works..... ..thats the difference ...
I totally agree that  there is much i dont know much sceince hasnt figured out things maybe it never will.. perhaps there is  blank blank and blank yet this is not proof of whatever i happen to prefer to entertain....  ..the thing is as far as i am i concerned science  has done a great job of  describng things so i can  understand   and until it does or if its does  i say i don't  know... could  there  be other life forms sure   but i stop there ..... because  beyond that  I don't know and that  to me is honest...

i also know that  my expericnes are not  static that i  lend to the interpretations that iI  hold by what I beleive in the first place ....

i also know that my sense perception is not 100%  accurate and all these things have to  be accounted for before i conclude oh yeah thats  an orb the known method of  communication   of the sheeble alien tribe.....(see how easy i did that...  made that up) .


some  think that  some  possess the abiblty to  contact dead folks if you think one can be raised from the dead see how easy it is to make the leap, some  think there is a satan so its real easy to make the leap to evil spirits  ..etc etc...many people beleive lots of thngs but they are claims taht is all we can claim and thats okay with  me if you want  to  beleive in the paranormal  knock yourself  out but if i dont it doesn't okay   ad hominen attacks on me or anyone.........

and what differentiates a claim from  fact is science  oy vey its a good thing we have   some thing in  place to  keep a check on human imagination good greif  man can get carried away and  can and has actaully hurt people with   his " belefs."......


heck in the course  of a lifetime  i have beleived lots of things but  get offended and upset because   others didint buy it .. why ....unless you yourself  aren't so sure.....

Edited by Tangerine Sheri, 05 August 2008 - 01:14 AM.




#802    TheKnight

TheKnight

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 August 2008 - 12:37 AM

Tangerine Sheri on Aug 4 2008, 05:32 PM, said:

.its not possible to know things for sure on personal experince..

Why not? From the context of your post it would seem as if you believed that because not everyone can know it like one person does, than know one knows it. It's either everyone or no one is it? Don't you think that's a little ridiculous?


#803    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,736 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" (Freud )

Posted 05 August 2008 - 12:47 AM

~HaParash~ on Aug 4 2008, 05:37 PM, said:

Why not? From the context of your post it would seem as if you believed that because not everyone can know it like one person does, than know one knows it. It's either everyone or no one is it? Don't you think that's a little ridiculous?

key word is 'for sure" 'absolutely' .....




#804    TheKnight

TheKnight

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 August 2008 - 12:49 AM

Tangerine Sheri on Aug 4 2008, 05:47 PM, said:

key word is 'for sure" 'absolutely' .....

Can anything be known for sure?


#805    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,736 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" (Freud )

Posted 05 August 2008 - 01:00 AM

~HaParash~ on Aug 4 2008, 05:49 PM, said:

Can anything be known for sure?


i stay away from for sures./absolutes......




#806    TheKnight

TheKnight

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 August 2008 - 01:03 AM

Tangerine Sheri on Aug 4 2008, 06:00 PM, said:

i stay away from for sures./absolutes......

If nothing can be known for sure, than what you said about personal experiences is irrelevant. Through a personal experience of life, we can know as much as things can be known that something is true.


#807    SQLserver

SQLserver

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,199 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity"

Posted 05 August 2008 - 01:05 AM

Hello-
Quite frankly, I've steered clear of this thread for a while(it seemed like one of those ones I wouldn't enjoy) until recently.

I must admit, these big threads scare me(I don't dare venture into the moon conspiracy thread) but I'll try my best to throw my input in.

Quote

I would never consider being a Christian for fear that I would turn into you.

I don't necessarily think that Christianity makes people evil. I think that evil makes people "Christian".

On rest of Church's post:
Absolutely. I think its important for everyone to remember that if Buddha and Gandhi aren't in heaven, what's the point in going?

Quote

I recently had a debate with someone regarding evolution and that person was far more knowledgable than I on the subject, I conceded that, and we parted ways amicably, but I at leat tried to understand what he was saying to me.

Don't you understand, Jor-El? It's not about "Creationism vs Evolution". It's not even about winning the debate. It's about the truth. Debating is all truth seeking, informing your opponent while being informed yourself. If your opponent is smarter, take it as an opportunity to learn something.

Quote

where I'm speaking to people who don't even want to understand the bible

You are doing that irrational psychological response to an overwhelming situation thing.

Quote

what were you expecting, me turning the other cheek?

Isn't that what you Christians are supposed to do, Jor-El?
"I like your Christ but not your christians. They are so unlike your Christ."~ Ghandi

Quote

but at least know what you are criticizing, talking snakes... jeez...

Oh, sorry. He didn't mean "talking snakes". He meant something more like "a fallen angel cast out from heaven who lives in an evil kingdom under the Earth telepathically controls a serpent and projects voice through its mouth"
Makes much more sense.

Cheers,
SQLserver




#808    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,736 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" (Freud )

Posted 05 August 2008 - 01:12 AM

~HaParash~ on Aug 4 2008, 06:03 PM, said:

If nothing can be known for sure, than what you said about personal experiences is irrelevant. Through a personal experience of life, we can know as much as things can be known that something is true.

ah i see haparash I'll correct my other  post , this is not a cut and dry answer my friend....  we have  methodology  called science that  allows for us to 'know' things  yet its not  100 percent  and its objective ..subjective experince   is limited on what it can  conclude.....not to say we dont use  personal expreince but its personal to the subject based on the filters the subject has in place...l   .it can't take a claim  to a known fact ( see above how known is being defined)...... .


if i wasnt pressed for time i would go  into greater detail .

Edited by Tangerine Sheri, 05 August 2008 - 01:15 AM.




#809    TheKnight

TheKnight

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 August 2008 - 01:17 AM

Tangerine Sheri on Aug 4 2008, 06:12 PM, said:

ah i see haparash I'll correct my other  post , this is not a cut and dry answer my friend....  we have  methodology  called science that  allows for us to 'know' things  yet its not  100 percent  and its objective ..subjective experince   is limited on what it can  conclude.....not to say we dont use  personal expreince but its personal to the subject based on the filters the subject has in place...l   .it can't take a claim  to a known fact ( see above how known is being defined)...... .


if i wasnt pressed for time i would go  into greater detail .

I would venture to say that objectivity cannot by reached by a human who has had experiences.


#810    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,736 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" (Freud )

Posted 05 August 2008 - 01:34 AM

sqlserver on Aug 4 2008, 06:05 PM, said:

Hello-
Quite frankly, I've steered clear of this thread for a while(it seemed like one of those ones I wouldn't enjoy) until recently.

I must admit, these big threads scare me(I don't dare venture into the moon conspiracy thread) but I'll try my best to throw my input in.


I don't necessarily think that Christianity makes people evil. I think that evil makes people "Christian".

On rest of Church's post:
Absolutely. I think its important for everyone to remember that if Buddha and Gandhi aren't in heaven, what's the point in going?


Don't you understand, Jor-El? It's not about "Creationism vs Evolution". It's not even about winning the debate. It's about the truth. Debating is all truth seeking, informing your opponent while being informed yourself. If your opponent is smarter, take it as an opportunity to learn something.


You are doing that irrational psychological response to an overwhelming situation thing.


Isn't that what you Christians are supposed to do, Jor-El?
"I like your Christ but not your christians. They are so unlike your Christ."~ Ghandi


Oh, sorry. He didn't mean "talking snakes". He meant something more like "a fallen angel cast out from heaven who lives in an evil kingdom under the Earth telepathically controls a serpent and projects voice through its mouth"
Makes much more sense.

Cheers,
SQLserver


thanks for your post  Sqlserver...two great points you made.... one: turnng the other cheek its in life when  these moments  come our way they are  gifts and perhaps should be seized for the experince of unity and peace... and in no time one learns how to turn the other cheek and you dont have to be christian to  get this......one can never  be too compassionate or practice kindness to much.......

second i almost  said that  when i came on here 4 years ago  i used to  hope like hell  that hyperactive and mklsgl  wouldn't  post  to my posts  and after being a defensive a few times   i  saw them  as  true gifts and opps to learn something and learn i did and still do and they are my  great freinds too....... .


i think church by all standards is one heck of a fair and compassionate  young man  and worth the trouble of  finding a way to make peace with....because  he will and he will see your side too Um is lucky to have him IMO....







0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users