The nature of the Almighty

@dpmartin,

Mr Dexter78
Sorry I haven't been available to reply

Look of course I can't prove to you in earthy things that there is a Living God. The Living God in not of the earth. Even your heart and mind are earthly things. This I can tell you, if you turn to Him in sincerity and in Truth, He will show you that He is within your reach, and if you receive His Word, revealed to the world as Jesus The Christ, you will have everlasting Life.

Even if you say I don't really believe your really there, but if you show me, I will believe. He will take you up on it.

Thanks for the conversation.

1 Reply

@dpmartin,

But he loves you. He loves you and he needs money. :eek: :p

Honk if you love Jesus!!:p

0 Replies

@Dexter78,

Dexter78 wrote:

Wanting a God, feeling there is one, that such a being is truth, guides, creates, etc. in no way validates it's existence. The feelings are real, but to make the leap that because the feelings are real, and one believes that God is the reason for them, therefore there is a God, is specious reasoning and can also be used to justify Santa Claus.

Just a fun question. If neuroscientists discovered a stimulation of a certain part of the brain invariably made an atheist a devote believer, and this simple procedure worked with 100% of all clients, then how much money would someone have to pay you to undergo the test? How much money does your atheism mean to you?

1 Reply

@harvey1,

harvey1 wrote:

Just a fun question. If neuroscientists discovered a stimulation of a certain part of the brain invariably made an atheist a devote believer, and this simple procedure worked with 100% of all clients, then how much money would someone have to pay you to undergo the test? How much money does your atheism mean to you?

You are not considering of the source of atheism. Pride. There is no price on pride, it has been the downfall of Kings and paupers.
An atheist, it seems to me, is self perpetuating. If he/she is fortunate then he has himself to thank. If he has calamity its chance. All the universe's wonders are science, emotions are chemical, life merely amino acids reacting. When they die, they just cease to exist, no reward, but then no price to pay for their deeds either.
Faith on the other hand, has to survive trials. Its not very self serving on the surface, even though the atheist would say its a blanket passing of the buck.
How much money is atheism worth? Its priceless.

1 Reply

@Irishcop,

Irishcop wrote:

An atheist, it seems to me, is self perpetuating. If he/she is fortunate then he has himself to thank. If he has calamity its chance. All the universe's wonders are science, emotions are chemical, life merely amino acids reacting. When they die, they just cease to exist, no reward, but then no price to pay for their deeds either.

Perhaps some atheists. I think though it is better to treat atheists as complex human beings who have the same doubts and same hopes as theists. Obviously there are things that you were told by your parents/guardians that you do not believe in which your parents/guardians believed and maybe even thought you should believe. People are very complex as to how they come to their beliefs. Answering "pride" makes a nice small box to put things in, but I don't think it helps us to understand what really motivates people. If you don't know what motivates them, then it's difficult to understand them, hence it's easy to write off their efforts to understand the world.

1 Reply

@harvey1,

harvey1 wrote:

Perhaps some atheists. I think though it is better to treat atheists as complex human beings who have the same doubts and same hopes as theists. Obviously there are things that you were told by your parents/guardians that you do not believe in which your parents/guardians believed and maybe even thought you should believe. People are very complex as to how they come to their beliefs. Answering "pride" makes a nice small box to put things in, but I don't think it helps us to understand what really motivates people. If you don't know what motivates them, then it's difficult to understand them, hence it's easy to write off their efforts to understand the world.

That's true, it was a small view of a complex concept. However, it was a small question.
I have made friendships with some very good people who are atheists. They are as complex as they are wonderful human beings. Perceptions causal to their conclusion is moot, and the end of the day.... When their life ends, they either have faith, or they don't. That is one condition that I think is black or white.
My point was this.... The common denominator is pride.

1 Reply

@Irishcop,

Christian defination--pride = intellectual integrity = sin? Very Happy

Honk if you love Jesus!! :p

1 Reply

@boagie,

boagie wrote:

Christian defination--pride = intellectual integrity = sin?

Honk if you love Jesus!! :p

I like to think I am an example, that "Christian" and "intellectual integrity" are not mutually exclusive terms.

1 Reply

@Irishcop,

Irishcop wrote:

I like to think I am an example, that "Christian" and "intellectual integrity" are not mutually exclusive terms.

Irishcop,

From a non-believers perspective they indeed are mutually exclusive.Christianities totalitarian ambitions and attack upon reason itself should be proof to all but believers.This is not to say there are not wonderfully educated, intelligent Christians,it has more to do with character than intelligence or perhaps temperament.

1 Reply

@boagie,

boagie wrote:

Irishcop,

From a non-believers perspective they indeed are mutually exclusive.Christianities totalitarian ambitions and attack unpon reason itself should be proof to all but believers.This is not to say there are not wonderfully educated, intelligent Christians,it has more to do with character than intelligence.

Indulge me on this, what is the basis for your believe that Christianity is totalitarian and that it is an attack on reason?
Totalitarianism is an ideology. does it really fit in a sequence like ...Fascism, Communism, Christianity, Despotism? Or whats wrong with this picture .... Pol Pot, Hitler, Jesus, Idi Amin, Stalin.
Christianity wants to spread like freedom, not like a blight.
An attack on reason, as you put it, changed the barbaric world, much for the better.

1 Reply

@Irishcop,

Irishcop,

Christianity is totalitarian in the same sense that Islam is totalitarian,and as powerful as Christianity is,she wants more.As a world religion it is innate and in its doctrine to spread the one true faith. Would you have any difficulty identifying Islam as ideology?The nature of Islam and the nature of Christianity are one and the same."Christianity wants to spread like freedom." Right, like she has done in the past all around the world,the history of Christianity is soaked in more blood than all the atrocities you could name.

Christianity wants access to the science classroom on the basis that creationism is science,one would have to be a moron to believe that.Just recently the right wing Christian president Bush has seen fit to refuse guides at the Grand Canyon site from relaying the geological age of the cayon,seems it could have been dug out during Noah flood,nor are they allowed to print it for distribution to park vistors."Changed the barbaric world for the better---------listen to yourself man! Every people they came across they labeled savages,and it was believe what we believe or we will kill you,which they did plenty of.So you tell me about good Christians they can use a creative PR man.Christians are not just against the separation of church and state,not just against evolutionary biology they are against rationality itself,because it knows rationality is it's enemy,and rightly so.

I am headed for the light on god's back porch!! :p

2 Replies

@boagie,

Hey Boagie,

You're speaking with a ton of emotion, so this discussion is probably fruitless. However, I think it is fair to say that if you were given an opportunity to move to countries where most of the government is atheist, that you would not choose to move to that country. Isn't this like the 40 year old guy living off his parents but criticizing the fact that his parents don't give all they have to charity?

1 Reply

@harvey1,

harvey1 wrote:

Hey Boagie,

You're speaking with a ton of emotion, so this discussion is probably fruitless. However, I think it is fair to say that if you were given an opportunity to move to countries where most of the government is atheist, that you would not choose to move to that country. Isn't this like the 40 year old guy living off his parents but criticizing the fact that his parents don't give all they have to charity?

harvey,

I know this is your area of expertise,intellectually you are quite impressive,but like I said,intellectual intigrity has more to do with character and/or temperament than it does the quality of the intellect.Harvey old buddy,would you move to a country where religion was absolute,as in many Muslim countries,unbelievers hanging from the lamp posts? Believers are of necessity dishonest,not only to others but even to themselves,fruitful dialogue,no I don't think so.I still get hooked though when believers start making their proclamations of certainty,base on nothing.

Honk if you love Jesus!! :p

1 Reply

@boagie,

boagie wrote:

...would you move to a country where religion was absolute,as in many Muslim countries,unbelievers hanging from the lamp posts?

Thanks, Boagie. To answer your question, "no way." I prefer living in a world that has a diversity of people and religious and non-religious views. I don't trust religion anymore than you, but I recognize its importance and necessity to balance the secular framework. I think this feature came about from Christianity by the Church's instruction from Jesus to keep secular and religious activities separate (e.g., pay unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and pay unto God the things that are God's). The apostle Paul followed up on this by giving government authority on religious matters. This maybe also stems from a much earlier time in Israel when there were two kingdoms that shared the same religion (i.e., the Northern and Southern kingdom). Since the religious authorities of the South had no impact on the governing body of the North, and vice versa, they developed a secular and religious division in their organization. Later when the two governments evolved into one, the religious scriptures of both were redacted into one set of holy scriptures. However, by this time a precedent had already been set where prophets and kings held separate positions.

So, whereas you see this secularity as freedom from religion, I see it as a consequence of religion.

1 Reply

@harvey1,

harvey,

I tend to agree,while I do not have much respect for what Christians often say they believe,I do believe that all human life is mythologically compelled.So,perhaps it would be a saner world if we talked about balance rather than an either/or mentality.I would suspect however,when the faithful say they wish to be reasonable,it is just a ploy.You yourself if I am recalling correctly,wish to see Christianity determineing what is to be taught in the public school system---I suppose under the pretext of equal time.I would suggest then that christianity embrace this concept of equal time in their own churches,as in open to the decent of the unbeliever.The bible of course when interpreted by the believer is going to be all virtue and light,its pathology is not at all apparent to the faithful.So Harvey,I do not know what the answer is,religion in one form or another is as certain to the future as it was to the past,how much room there will be for reason in the future remains to be seen,it looks rather dark doesn't it.

harvey,perhaps you could expand upon your view that religion is needed,indeed is a necessity to balance the secular framework.I am curious as to why some people believe this.It seems the anti-thesis to enlightenment.

We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive. ~Albert Einstein

The Devil made me do it!! :eek:

1 Reply

@boagie,

boagie wrote:

You yourself if I am recalling correctly,wish to see Christianity determineing what is to be taught in the public school system

That's not my view. I think that people of a community should have a say in government considering what they value, however this does not mean they have a right to carelessly trample the rights of minorities or keep society in the dark (e.g., about science, history, etc.).

boagie wrote:

...perhaps you could expand upon your view that religion is needed,indeed is a necessity to balance the secular framework.I am curious as to why some people believe this.It seems the anti-thesis to enlightenment.

A large number of secularized people are inherently selfish, I think. A capitalized society is great, and I endorse it, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't breed a whole world of *****. Religious people in a fully religious society also produces a whole breed of *****, but when religious people are thrown into a secular and religious diverse society, over time they tend to moderate their views and their religion really works within the context of a community. When religious people dominate (e.g., in certain areas of the deep South), the effect can be much worse than the capitalized secularist who just wants you to get out of the way of his Mercedes as he speeds through the parking lot.

boagie wrote:

The Devil made me do it!! :eek:

And you loved every minute! Smile

1 Reply

@dpmartin,

So Mr. Harvey1
Tho you may have already stated elsewhere, and I apologize if I missed it. What is your position on Jesus the Christ?

1 Reply

@harvey1,

harvey1 wrote:

That's not my view. I think that people of a community should have a say in government considering what they value, however this does not mean they have a right to carelessly trample the rights of minorities or keep society in the dark (e.g., about science, history, etc.)."

Christianity is hardley a minority,still, it seems a noble stance.There would have to be a limit as to how many minorities society must accommodate before fractureing.boagie

"A large number of secularized people are inherently selfish, I think. A capitalized society is great, and I endorse it, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't breed a whole world of *****. Religious people in a fully religious society also produces a whole breed of *****, but when religious people are thrown into a secular and religious diverse society, over time they tend to moderate their views and their religion really works within the context of a community. When religious people dominate (e.g., in certain areas of the deep South), the effect can be much worse than the capitalized secularist who just wants you to get out of the way of his Mercedes as he speeds through the parking lot."

This is interesting harvey,and makes even me a little hopeful about Christianity.That is a very powerful premise,context defines is I believe a universal principle.Christianities inability to change with changeing circumstances has always bothered me,it does not have the flexiablity of oral traditions.Yet,there has to be some truth to this idea,even for Christianity,perhaps at least context will round its sharp edges. boagie

Consider it in isolation,and it is not!

And you loved every minute!

Again harvey,it is my pleasure!! Smile

0 Replies

@dpmartin,

dpmartin wrote:

...I apologize if I missed it. What is your position on Jesus the Christ?

I'm a Christian. I didn't realize that this wasn't clear.

1 Reply

@harvey1,

You've been bad harvey!! Very Happy

I don't think your Christian enough!That was the inference no? This won't do,it is divide and conquer the foe,close your ranks fellows!!

Virgin Mary,right! Virgin Bertha too!! horny little god he was!

1 Reply

The nature of the Almighty

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know