Why do people believe the bible?

[Mr Walker]

18 hours ago, eight bits said:

"Papal infallibility" is limited to formal statements defining already long-existing doctrines bearing on faith and morals. Why so limited? Because throughout history, Popes have said many embarrassing things, so this mechanism ensures that very little of what any Pope has said or ever will say will be viewed as binding on his successors. However, it also provides for doctrinal definition without having to call a church council.

The provision has been invoked far too rarely for anybody to know what would happen if a council overruled a Pope's formally valid exercise of Papal infallibility, or if a council simply withdrew the grant of authority.

By the way, as provocative as the name of the thing is, it's actually a fairly common legislative device. Councils are the ultimate temporal authorities in the Church, but are rarely in session. So, Vatican I appointed the Pope to exercise some of its own authority until another Council would be convened. They ought to have called the thing interim oversight, but they didn't. Big whoop,

Good news, I was able to read it. So, the part about the Pope being God?, being able to rewrite the Bible?, ... oh, there it is, right next to his ability to leap tall buildings in a single bound.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P16.HTM

Stunning, the Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic Church. And they come right out and say it. Well researched!

Business correspondence isn't a record? OK. So now we're up to the Fourth Century or so?

Then there's one small-c catholic church, of which Rome is a member but not the dominant member (It's a prestigious see, don't get me wrong, but its bishop cannot tell another major city's bishop what to do and expect to be obeyed).Jewish Christianity is at best rare and may be extinct. This one catholic church is growingly hostile against both Juadism and Paganism, plus several varieties of Christianity.

Looking at that picture, I'd conjecture that they were aggressively opposed to every religion but their own.

You mean like the way that the Jewish religion was an evolution of the antecedent Canaanite religions? The way Protestantism is an evolution of Roman Catholicism (you do realize that Luther was more Catholic than the Pope?). At what point, in your view, does a new religion come to be regarded as a distinct religion? It would seem to me the things that you complain about as "non-Biblical" are precisiely the kind of things that would distinguish one religion from another (holy days, dietary customs, body modifications or not, ...).

Anyway, whether or not you view Paul's letters as business records, they announce a new religion which hadn't existed before him. Paul definitely hoped that the new Gentile religion and the not much older related Jewish sect would integrate, but that wasn't what happened.

You keep saying this, and you have yet to give a single example. And no, they don't HAVE to rewrite anything. They just read Paul who pronounces that the Law doesn't bind the Gentiles. Oh, OK. We can meet on Sunday, then? Sure can. Just as Muslims can gather on Fridays, even though they accept that Jewish Scriptures were revealed by Allah.

Now, nothing prevents an even newer religion, like Seventh Day Adventism, for example, from preferring to revive selected practices of a different religion, Judaism. (Most people would agree that Seventh Day Adventism is not a branch of Judaism.) No doubt, like so many religions, apologists for the new-new religion will say that other religions are doing some things wrong, and they will even offer arguments why they themselves are doing those things right. Great. Whatever floats your boat.

Yup i mean in that way  It becomes a new "religion" when it rejects the basic precepts and tenets of the old one. 

Arguably, protestant Christianity is quite a different religion to Catholic Christianity 

I agree that the bible can be interpreted and followed in many ways 

My point is two fold.

 Which way is the most  constructive for the most people, and which way is the closest to the principles of the founders of the religion? 

Catholicism has moved far away from  the founding principles and Christ's teachings and while it has offered a great deal of hope and comfort to millions, it has also led Christianity into a destructive and less loving path.  Modern peole turn away from a god or religion that preaches eternal  hell fire and damnation  from the time you die,  which is also contrary to the writings of the bible.  

All faiths have their strengths and weaknesses. A person needs to pick the one which has the best balance for them and their values , not just dogmatically follow the faith of their parents. 

[Mr Walker]

16 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Still better than a team of liars. 

That's the one your in with Walker will and your newest member 

If you lie you will be called out on it. 

No such team except in your mind Are you a member  of the team of skeptics who attack those who believe?  Only speaking for myself, but you will NEVER catch me out in a lie  You consider anything you dont believe to be true to be a lie, but it doesn't work like that  Try PROVING  any statement  I  have made is a lie .

[Mr Walker]

15 hours ago, danydandan said:

You can say what you 'meant' all you like, your history of ostentatiousness is always going to follow you around, unfortunately for you. 

I don't believe anything you say about your person or personal life anymore, and I'm not the only one. So stick to the opinions and stop with the anecdotes. Or not I couldn't care less, the only ability you have is to off-topic every thread by adding extraordinary claims or unsupported anecdotal nonsense. You know that these claims elicit a certain response and you revel in these responses. Then cry foul when someone questions your delusions of grandeur.

As i said, you  interpret through YOUR prejudices not mine.

  Why is any of my life ostentatious?

to me it is perfectly normal  even my own family members live more ostentatious lives than me.

At least i dont take a month to go and live in a villa in Tuscany  so i can take part in a truffle festival; or do a cycling and barge trip along the Rhine  

I dont walk across Australia, alone with a push cart, as my cousin did n her fifties, or enter the miss south Australia contest as another cousin did .

  I didnt get perfect scores in my final high school year, and do a doctorate in biological/ nuclear physics, or a double law and environment degree like my nephews and nieces.  I didn't win a citizen of the year award like my mother, and I am not a multi millionaire like my brothers and sisters.

If you dont believe, then you will NEVER understand me, and if you  don't understand me, you will NEVER "get" my thoughts, values,  priorities etc

Thus, no post i ever write will be acceptable to you.  That is YOUR loss not mine. You will never learn anything from me.  

 I cry foul because they are not lies or delusions.

They are all true .

Unless you can prove them false, you have no right simply state, as a factual statement, that i am lying or delusional (although you can offer it as your opinion, and i would find tha t understandable) 

Edited February 5, 2019 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

13 hours ago, danydandan said:

Yeah of course my opinion is coloured by his past antics that's what everyone does, he has build a persona, built upon ostentatiousness, delusions of grandeur and waffling. Therefore everything he says has that tinge to me. 

Put this way, Habitat do you in your life know someone who is a liar? If said person, known to be a liar, told you a story would their history not colour your opinion of this story? Or would you just believe it without question? 

Would you go to the same car dealership that ripped you off, again to get another car? 

You might do, who knows, but you'd be a fool if you did. People do not change. Like my past comments colour your opinion of me and thus my future comments too,.

How do you know i am a liar (Actually you cannot know this, because i am not, but rhetorically, how can you KNOW that any thing i have claimed is untrue. Just because they are outside your own experiences does not make them untrue  

[Mr Walker]

13 hours ago, danydandan said:

I agree nothing is at stake.

But do not agree that I'm entitled to my opinion based on past comments made by MrWalker? 

Specifically the grandiose claims of intellectual abilities? 

Not grandiose. All true and from my real life experiences. the y are not even unusual My brother has a faster mind and reading abilty than i do. My nephew has an intellect far surpassing mine He is the one with a doctorate in molecular nuclear biology and married to a clinical psychologist)    Part of the problem is tha t when i talk about my life people contrast it with their own and sometimes think I am claiming superiority I am not.  I know my capabilities an limitations   I am very good a t a lot of things, and absolutely hopeless at some. (cant play a single note on any musical instrument for example ) 

[Mr Walker]

13 hours ago, danydandan said:

He claims to be an English teacher once upon a time, he makes so many grammatical errors it erodes any plausibility of this claim. Of course secondary English teachers aren't infallible but the amount if errors speaks volumes. 

We once had a private debate on the definition of the word fact, I emailed Oxford English dictionary for their definition, he rejected it as it didn't agree with him. But anyways.

Getting upset about his claims or opinions is rather silly, but doesn't mean others, myself or you can't question them and ask for some sort of substantial evidence to justify his claim. He then gets upset (yeah the guy who claims not to feel negative emotions gets upset) when he can't produce any evidence and cries foul when he is called out on it or when is anecdotal evidence isn't universally accepted.

Edit: He might seem benign, but he isn't. This website is great for providing checks and balances to discussion. If everyone just ignored his claims all the time, I'd suspect he disappear. Generally I don't read his comments unless he is replying to me or someone else, as he is on the ole ignore list. If I see something that I feel needs addressing I'll comment on it. Like the ignorance he has on the topic of Catholicism Canon Law. 

That is because fact has two separate  defintions  A fact as a statement capable of being proven true or false is a t least 400 years old.

Thus we have false statements of fact  and false facts. To teach that a fact is always correct would be an error.  In all my education and teaching in Australia (spanning over 60 years)  I never encountered the idea that a fact had to always be true.  i was taught, and i taught, that  a fact unlike an opinion or belief was capable of being proven true or false.  

[Mr Walker]

13 hours ago, danydandan said:

He either is a complete idiot, or he knows what elicits a certain response and he posts comments to rise such responses. He has been here for ten years or more doing the same thing over and over again. Guess he doesn't learn.

Neither is true The responses come as they do because i am different to some people. (there are also posters here who both publicly and privately support me)

  I tell the truth as i understand it it and i can support claims of truth (as opposed to opinion) via sources.

  i was raised to question everything and not to base  a view on emotion, opinion, or custom, but upon knowledge.

  I am not responsible for another's response, nor  should i alter my own style (or content)  to make them feel more comfortable  BUT i don't play games with people. i don't try and work their emotions i use facts and knowledge to support my points.

Indeed, I despise manipulative sociopathic types, who enjoy baiting, trolling, and  manipulating others. They are evil, and can do a lot of harm to those with low self esteem or lack of certainty of self.   

Edited February 5, 2019 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

13 hours ago, danydandan said:

That's true, more the fool us who respond in personal attacks. 

I'm at odds whether calling him ostentatious is a personal attack, considering he thinks being modest is abhorrent.

lol I try to be open and honest.

I see both modesty and ostentatious as false personas which, in a way, presents a lie to others about yourself.

However ostentatious is a more subjective, and thus less objectionable,  label than some, like narcissist  

In my life i am probably the opposite of ostentatious.  i wear very plain clothes,  no jewelry, ordinary hair cut, and present, as a mild mannered reporter for the daily planet  might do 

  I own two pairs of trousers,  two pairs of shoes,  (all purchased second hand from charity shops) and just enough shirts socks and jocks to last through a washing cycle of 7-8 days .   The shirts are all second hand, but i do buy new socks and jocks  My last pairs of trousers lasted me 13 years.  

Edited February 5, 2019 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

10 hours ago, eight bits said:

Not yet, but we have one active poster who believes another book that "complements" the Bible.

Actually, I haven't read that book etiher, but from your description of it, Paul was saying that almost 2000 years ago.

We are apes. Size matters.

 

Nup; we are hairless apes. Thus performance ( and psychology)  matters more. Perception is all.   

[Habitat]

Obviously Mr Walker, there is a psychological need to believe in the "devil", if they can't can't stomach the biblical version,it is necessary to find something closer to hand, to project all that nastiness on to ! Thanks for taking the load, I think it is your mild-mannered approach that emboldens them, to go on the attack, more than anything else.

[+Sherapy]

5 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Neither is true The responses come as they do because i am different to some people. (there are also posters here who both publicly and privately support me)

  I tell the truth as i understand it it and i can support claims of truth (as opposed to opinion) via sources.

  i was raised to question everything and not to base  a view on emotion, opinion, or custom, but upon knowledge.

  I am not responsible for another's response, nor  should i alter my own style (or content)  to make them feel more comfortable  BUT i don't play games with people. i don't try and work their emotions i use facts and knowledge to support my point is.

Indeed, I despise manipulative sociopathic types, who enjoy baiting, trolling, and  manipulating others. They are evil, and can do a lot of harm to those with low self esteem or lack of certainty of self.   

"Indeed, I despise manipulative sociopathic types, who enjoy baiting, trolling, and  manipulating others. They are evil, and can do a lot of harm to those with low self esteem or lack of certainty of self" ( Walker).

So because you despise this type of personality are you saying you could never manipulate, troll, or bait posters? 

 

 

 

 

[Mr Walker]

8 hours ago, 029b10 said:

While I am not questioning your faith, so hopefully it won't be perceived as such; yet I have found the passage in Hebrews 11:6 regarding those who come to God to be an interesting subject since it represents by implication that a person who comes to God would not know whether God actually existed or not, but unless one believed in the possibility of his existence then they would never be able to come to the knowledge of him. 

If he who comes to God must believe he is, then obviously they wouldn't know him, or have any knowledge of him since it is written that they must believe he is.  Since hope is believing something is true without any evidence of it's truth, then could explain what you meant exactly by your response that you came to God by recognition?

( I consider recognition to be the identification of someone or something or person from previous encounters or knowledge so maybe you have a better definition or define it a little different that the one I am using.)

There are people who cannot believe on/in faith.

Fortunately, sometimes god goes to them, so that they do not miss out on a relationship with  "him" 

[Mr Walker]

6 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

I don't have to explain it to others. 

Others have to explain it to themselves (when the universe speaks to them within) why they either ignore, or recognize what they're experiencing.

 

ETA: For the record, when the universe speaks to me, I regularly ignore what I'm experiencing. To my detriment.

 

 

Oh boy can i relate to that; although, being older and wiser than you Will,  i almost always listen and obey, these days. 

[+Sherapy]

9 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

lol I try to be open and honest.

I see both modesty and ostentatious as false personas which, in a way, presents a lie to others about yourself.

However ostentatious is a more subjective, and thus less objectionable,  label than some.

In my life i am probably the opposite of ostentatious.  i wear very plain clothes,  no jewelry, ordinary hair cut, and present as a mild mannered reporter for the daily planet  might do 

  I own two pairs of trousers,  two pairs of shoes,  (all purchased second hand from charity shops) and just enough shirts socks and jocks to last through a washing cycle of 7-8 days .   The shirts are all second hand, but i do buy new socks and jocks  My last pairs of trousers lasted me 13 years.  

Interesting, you bring in  how you dress as the point to defend, a point not even mentioned. 

We all get you are lower income and buy your clothes from Goodwill and no one cares or would begrudge you stretching a dollar. 

IMHO! Dan is not referencing this, he is talking about all the bragging you do about yourself. I for one am fine with bragging if there is something to brag about. I don't see it in your case, but I am one of many opinions, while entitled to it it is about as significant as defending explaining a point not even mentioned, especially for a person who brags he is beyond such human silliness. Lol 

 

[Mr Walker]

12 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Obviously Mr Walker, there is a psychological need to believe in the "devil", if they can't can't stomach the biblical version,it is necessary to find something closer to hand, to project all that nastiness on to ! Thanks for taking the load, I think it is your mild-mannered approach that emboldens them, to go on the attack, more than anything else.

Maybe.

I think i just frustrate them.

i wont go away. I wont shut up, and i wont be swayed by bullying or  harassment. 

While some are debatable, all my factual  points are arguable, using scientific sources,  and all my personal anecdotes are true  

Look; I can understand a certain legitimacy with people who disbelieve some things are possible; first because the y have never experienced them and second because, in today's materialist culture spiritual matters are uncool. 

But if the y keep their minds closed, they will go to their graves knowing nothing more than the y do now. 

[Mr Walker]

6 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Interesting, you bring in  how you dress as the point to defend, a point not even mentioned. 

We all get you are lower income and buy your clothes from Goodwill and no one cares or would begrudge you stretching a dollar. 

IMHO! Dan is not referencing this, he is talking about all the bragging you do about yourself. I for one am fine with bragging if there is something to brag about. I don't see it in your case, but I am one of many opinions, while entitled to it it is about as significant as defending explaining a point not even mentioned, especially for a person who brags he is beyond such human silliness. Lol 

 

I was called ostentatious. How you dress and appear is directly related to being ostentatious  Hence my comment. 

I am not ostentatious in ANY way. I don't overdress and i don't over talk myself.  I am what I am. ( coz i eats me spinach. toot! toot!)    YOurs is  also a subjective opinion, based on how you  think it is normal  for  a person to present themselves and talk about themsleves.   I dont brag (ie exaggerate anything about myself) i am just totally open and honest about my life, from within my own subjective world view.  

I dont consider you bragging when you explain how well you raised your boys and what good people the y turned out to be.

I believe this is true and you are right to tell the world about it.I t goes to one of your strengths of character and a mjor prt of who you are 

Same thing when you talk about your loving relationship with your husband. That is not bragging its a simple truth of which you should be proud.

Same thing when you talk about your ongoing education and betterment with learning and employment.

YUP you should  be happy to tell the world.

It is justified   

Edited February 5, 2019 by Mr Walker

[+Sherapy]

8 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

I was called ostentatious. How you dress and appear is directly related to being ostentatious  Hence my comment. 

 

8 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

I was called ostentatious. How you dress and appear is directly related to being ostentatious  Hence my comment. 

Think about it Einstein, ostentatious includes achievements and abilities, a boaster, a braggart type. 

This is the only thing he would mean. How you dress doesn't apply. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 5, 2019 by Sherapy

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

 

Think about it Einstein, ostentatious  includes achievements and abilities, one who brags incessantly about these things where is your defense for this? 

 

 

 

 

 

look, if you really can't stand him, just give him "life without parole", aka, ignore him !

[Mr Walker]

2 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

 

Think about it Einstein, ostentatious includes achievements and abilities, a boaster, a braggart type. 

This is the only thing he would mean. How you dress doesn't apply. 

 

 

 

 

 

I disagree  One part of character is connected to all others  

I talk about myself, as i dress.

  Simply, truthfully, without making stuff up or leaving stuff out; without being modest or bragging,  without much thought, or care or worry, about other's reactions   I don't dress to impress and i dont write to impress. What you see is just me.

 I have no need to impress anyone else. I am impressed enough with myself  

[+Sherapy]

Just now, Habitat said:

look, if you really can't stand him, just give him "life without parole", aka, ignore him !

This is your conclusion, not mine. 

I am satirically asking a question. Lol 

Not everyone will appreciate my humour. 

[Mr Walker]

4 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

This is your conclusion, not mine. 

I am satirically asking a question. Lol 

Not everyone will appreciate my humour. 

And i don't mind those sort of questions, I can appreciate them and do my best to answer them.  But i don't see myself bragging, by any definition of the word  I've never made up or exaggerated any story about myself  Never had to.

Of course all definitions of bragging include subjective words like excessive. pompous or arrogant 

  

bragging

Dictionary result for bragging

/ˈbraɡɪŋ/

noun

1.

excessively proud and boastful talk about one's achievements or possessions.

"she interrupted their endless bragging"

 

adjective

1.

exhibiting or characterized by excessive pride or boastfulness.

"a competitive, bragging culture"

 

It is all about tone 

Eg  "I was the fastest runner on the team"  is simply a statement.

it only becomes a boast if there is an element of cockiness or self gratification in the tone and really only if the speaker means it with tha t tone.

It cannot be established via the listeners perception.

Even if they THINK it sounds boastful, it is not, unless the speaker intended it to be.  

Edited February 5, 2019 by Mr Walker

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

I am satirically asking a question. Lol 

Hmmmm…….that doesn't mean you are baiting him, does it ? Anyways, I am indebted to you for accurately describing third eye's work as "incoherent and absurd " 

[+Sherapy]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

I disagree  One part of character is connected to all others  

I talk about myself, as i dress.

  Simply, truthfully, without making stuff up or leaving stuff out; without being modest or bragging,  without much thought, or care or worry, about other's reactions   I don't dress to impress and i dont write to impress. What you see is just me.

 I have no ne I have no need to impress anyone else. I am impressed enough with myself  

" I have no need to impress anyone else. I am impressed enough with myself " ( Walker).

Exactly, this is his point. Hence the reason he used ostentatious to describe you. Lol  

And, I would go further to add you seek to share as much as possible, how impressive you think you are. 

 

It is not true that you don't care what others think because you spend a lot of time defending, explaining, aka known as denying you care, when you do. 

 

 

[SHaYap]

 

20 hours ago, Habitat said:

You have been called to account for your accusation, and have failed to deliver. Duck, dodge, weave, dance, you got the moves ! Anything but the straight talk ! And these are the types of people always crying for the "proof" !  Stand and deliver !

 

19 hours ago, Habitat said:

Had enough of slandering people for one day, have you ? Another low-slung specimen on the "team" goes to water !

It is not slander when you so shamelessly pander to the lowest available denominator ... consider all things as stood and delivered

~

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

I will make a joint consultation for her and me.  

If you were professionally 'Trained and Educated' in the field you must know that that is not how 'Consultations' are made ... further evidence of your false claims

~

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Nothing wrong with the language, other than me leaving out a few commas.   

i don't have your obsession with dotting the I s and crossing the Ts in every sentence in a post.   

Nothing wrong ? Missing commas? Is that all your years of extensive experience in Teaching comes down to ?

Compare :

20 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

lol so what you don't believe you call a lie, and what you have no evidences for you also call a lie. 

Ok prove to me you are Malaysian, otherwise i will be forced to  believe that you are lieing about that. and thus are lieing about everything you post .

Why should i believe a word you post . (not that you post much about yourself at all )

Oh i know. You are actually sherapy posting under a different name and style, and writing incoherent  English so we don't guess the truth.   

Come on; prove you are not, otherwise you must be.  

 

... and ...
 

Quote

 

~

The present participle of lie is not lieing. The I becomes a Y: lying. Here is a mnemonic from the website Primility to help you tell laying and lying apart: “If you tell an untruth it is a lie, not a lay; and if you are in the process of telling an untruth you are lying and not laying.”

Lay vs. Lie - Grammarly

 

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/lay-lie/

 

~

Lieing dictionary definition | lieing defined - YourDictionary

 

https://www.yourdictionary.com/lieing

lieing. Verb. Common misspelling of lying.

 

~

lieing - definition and meaning - Wordnik

 

https://www.wordnik.com/words/lieing

lieing: Common misspelling of lying. ... Support. Help support Wordnik (and make this page ad-free) by adopting the word lieing here.

 

~

 

The common denominator of your obsession with your lies here provided further evidence to prove your intrinsic nature to lie ... an obsession that is second only to your possessed nature to further perpetuate more lies.

Perhaps you can { Help support Wordnik by dopting the word lieing here. }

~

 

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

" I have no need to impress anyone else. I am impressed enough with myself "

Classic !