But how do you evaulate whether it is true or not if you remove your wisdom? I can have faith that the Invisible Pink Unicorn created us all; would you say that my faith offers truth that confounds convention? And for quite a while, conventional wisdom said that there was a God, Jesus; “everybody” knew that. Why should we only ignore conventional wisdom when it disagrees with your particular faith?
There is evidence, it simply does not measure up to the standards you use to determine what is true, so you do not believe. There’s tons of anecdotal evidence of crystal healing, plenty of historical reports of dragons, impressive-sounding papers on how crystals work or dragons could fly (and why we never found any dragon bones)…the same sort of evidence offered to convince me to believe in Jesus. Not to mention all the other religions–Judaism, Hinduism, Pagan, Dionysian, that seem to have just as much evidence as yours. The evidence offered for religions does not measure up to the standards I use to determine what is true, so I do not believe.
Gee, I guess those Japanese must really not be seeking God as much as Americans do, since not many of them are Christians. You agreed before that upbringing and culture make a big difference as to which religion is chosen. The fact that if the Japanese had been born in America they probably would be Christian just means that if you have the misfortune to be born in the wrong place, you’re probably going to Hell, unlike those lucky Americans.
Two, I say TWO, fundies who’ve now admitted that they don’t read all of God’s words.
So, tell me again, why we should listen to a thing you have to say about His words when you, yourself, and by your own admission, deign to disregard said Word?
Nope; never said that. On this board I mentioned that I’m a Mormon. I know it’s a big phrase and hard to spell, but it’s really Latter Day Saint.
Your assertion that only a Christian can have knowledge of the Bible kind of negates the efficacy of preaching conversion, doesn’t it? Luckily, that’s an absurd assertion on your part.
Never bring faith to a contest of intellect. It is not the appropriate tool. Never make argument for the logical quality of your beliefs, unless you are submitting your beliefs to the judgment of logic. Logic is a sharp tool, and cuts away any matter that does not fall within its compass. When used with skill, and without prejudice, it can guide the cautious and well-disciplined mind around many types of falsehood, and error. Faith will not do this.
Never seek beyond the realm of deterministic reality with the tools of logic, for they must, by their own definition, fail to apply. They can reject all other matters as illogical, and that judgment cannot be countered, within the axioms of logic. What is not provable is beyond the perception of anyone who will deny what cannot be proven. That the world might exceed our understanding is not testable by our understanding.
I shall not drag my faith through the gutter of debate, nor accept that argument makes it invalid. It is not logical. It is not provable, nor will I attempt to prove it to you. You might find it, yourself, if that is what you wish, and it that cause I will willingly lend you what minor aid is mine to make your path easier. You might, as well, pursue the denial of God, or faith, or love, or any thing outside of physical evidence. In that task I will oppose you, should your desire be to lessen the love, or faith, of others. If it is simply your desire to limit your own life to that which does not cross any boundary of logic, or science, as you perceive them, I shall not oppose you, though it is my belief that you harm yourself thereby.
To claim that ones faith is held by reason is to deny ones own faith, and cast ones fate upon the slender support of ones own reason. I prefer to live within the strength of God’s love for all man, and the great power of that Love, as made real by His son, Jesus. I do not offer you proof. He offers you eternal salvation. I offer you encouragement. We offer you love. His is the greater.
I know people who do not read the bible, and have faith beyond my own understanding. I know souls so filled with the Spirit of God, that they shine their warmth into my soul, and yet those souls lie together with minds unable to understand one word of the bible. It is not necessary to be intelligent, literate, or even able to hear or see to know God, to know Jesus, and to be given faith beyond the reach of genius. You mind is not your soul. You should be very glad that is so. I rejoice that I am not limited by my feeble perceptions.
I’m not sure what else I can offer you in the way of answers as to why God chose to set up the way of salvation like He did. I have faith in Him, and this is something that I now realize cannot be explained sufficiently in the confines of a logical debate.
Monty:
This question is ridiculous, but I knew you would ask it. Again. I have read the entire New Testament. I have read the majority of the Old Testament. More importantly, I have studied them. Reading an entire book (even several times) doesn’t do you a lot of good if you don’t understand what you are reading.
Just because I have not read the entire Bible (though I have read the vast majority of it, I haven’t got to all of it yet, such as I and II Chronicles, etc.) doesn’t disqualify me from making informed opinions about it or trying to convince others about it. That assertion is ridiculous.
You said that I said that faith requires faith. I never said this.
Well, let’s see…
You said I had a “hard on” with pressing my views on people. Not only is that rude, it’s vulgar. You referred to me as a “fundie”, which I consider to be a derogatory use of the word fundamentalist.
You. I was referring to Matthew 7:6 “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.” As I mentioned earlier, I posted this while I was angry, and I apologize. It was uncalled for.
I haven’t skipped anything. I just haven’t reached them in my studies yet. I guess that invalidates everything I said, according to you.
**
Twin said:
quote:
It seems like I read somewhere that you said you were not a Christian. Therefore, it’s IMPOSSIBLE for
you to know what you’re talking about when it comes to the Bible. BTW, I know it’s a big word and hard to spell, but it’s fundamentalist.**
I’m sorry that I asserted that, then. And I will call you a Latter Day Saint if you wish. I would never disrespect you by calling you anything else, even if I disagree with your choice of religion.
I’m just stating what the Bible says. I’m not saying ONLY a Christian can have knowledge of the Bible. But the truth of the Bible is spiritually discerned. The Spirit of God gives Christians insights into the Bible and it’s truth. You have said that the Bible is a book of fables. Do you say all of the Bible is a book of fables, even the parts mentioning Jesus? If so, then how can you call yourself a Christian? You can’t just pick and choose what parts you want to believe are true and call the others fables.
Conversion does not require that the converted believes every point of doctrine. They just need to realize and accept the four steps I mention below.
As long as you:
Realize that you are a sinner.
Realize that there is nothing you can do to pay for your sins.
Realize that your sins have already been paid for by Jesus, the perfect, virgin-born son of God.
Accept the gift of salvation by asking Jesus Christ to become your personal savior.
Then I have no problem with you saying you are a Christian.
Triskadecamus:
Thank you for giving me a proper perspective on trying to explain my faith in a logical manner. I see now that it is a fruitless task to try to do so. As such, I will refrain from doing so in the future.
I did not quote you, as you now assert, when I said that you asserted Faith requires Faith. I said that you asserted that. That’s essentially your assertion, now isn’t it? You’re apparently saying that only Christians (those with faith in Christ) can truly understand “God’s wisdom” (faith) and that anything which appears to contradict your faith must be examined in faith to be truly understood, in faith.
Also, evidently, you really didn’t understand all that much of the New Testament seeing as you’re calling me “a pig.” Or I guess “pig” as a term applied to a human being, in your estimation, doesn’t qualify under this verse:
Now the footnote in my Bible for “Raca” says:
I trust you can readily see that the “without cause” referred just to anger, and not to your use of the slur “pig.” And “pig” when used to describe a human as you use it, most certainly is a term of contempt and derision.
I don’t mind being called Mormon, lot of folks do that; even Mormons use the term. I didn’t say that I didn’t like being called that. What I did do, however, was to show that the terms can be used interchangeably just like “Fundie” for “Fundamentalist.” Both of the latter terms have been used on this board in a merely descriptive manner; a “shorthand,” if you will. No rancor involved in my use of it. My use of the expression “hard-on” isn’t by any means vulgar on this particular board. Check a few of the threads in the BBQ Pit and even some other threads in Great Debates to see some real vulgarity. I used the expression in a merely metaphorical manner which I was sure that the Teeming Millions could understand in its intended sense. Again, I did not use the term “Fundie” as a slur, and I obviously (at least to me) do not intend it to be such. For that matter, the term “Christian” apparently was originally a slur, finally adopted by those who worshipped Christ and thus negating the slur. “Mormon” also had a similar evolution as a word. Now “pig” used to describe a human being certainly doesn’t have such a connotation.
Also, by this statement of yours above:
You have placed yourself in the position of judging someone; that is, you are presuming to sit in Jesus’ place. Please explain “pride” to me; using your vast biblical knowledge, of course.
I’d be delighted to see, though, your proof that the world-wide Deluge happened, seeing as it’s been proven to not have happened. Or is this one of those proofs that you discount because it contradicts your faith?
“Fundie” is indeed used in a derisive manner. You know that. Whether you meant it that way or not is irrelevant to his being offended by it.
Having a “hard on” is indeed vulgar. You know that. Just because there are more vulgar things posted in other threads does NOT make it pleasant.
And you know full well that many people do not consider Saints to be Christians. Is it judgemental? You betcha. Do many, if not most, LDS think I’m unsaved and lost in the outer dark for not being Mormon? You betcha. Is that judgemental? You betcha. Mr. Kettle? Meet Mr. Pot.
And finally, I’m guessing that you’ve read and studied the Bible, the BoM, D&C and Pearl, right? If you were to encounter a fellow Saint who had not read them completely (and hooboy are there a few), would that person be forbidden to profess his faith in LDS teachings? Puh-leeze.
Nope, it’s a shorthand. Actually, to be honest, I think a lot of people even use the term “Fundamentalist” in a derogatory manner. Tell you what, just to make sure it doesn’t happen again; please be so kind as to list every single thing you consider vulgar so I don’t hurt your precious sensibilities.
Thanks for yet another lesson in mind-reading. Tell you what, just to make sure it doesn’t happen again; please be so kind as to list every single thing you consider vulgar so I don’t hurt your precious mind-reading sensibilities.
Yep. I know that and I disagree with them.
Then isn’t it about time some fundamentalist admitted that?
Those who profess that are not professing what the LDS church leadership teaches, and from my experience most LDS do not consider fellow Christians “unsaved.” There is a difference in that theology between “saved” and “exalted.” Please refer to my posting earlier regarding Twin talking about stuff he doesn’t know about.
Yep, and I never said the fundamentalists were not saved, now did I?
Not too keen on your reading and comprehension skills of late, hey?
Not too much of a guess seeing as I’ve stated more than a few times on this board that I’ve read and studied them and that I’ve also read and studied the Koran.
I’ve never said that. Refer, please, to my comment about your R&C skills. What I did was ask the dude who was making incorrect assertions about them and making my observations on said assertions.
This is my last post in this thread. We have a difference of theological belief that cannot be settled over a message board.
I already apologized for referring to you as a pig. I already said it was uncalled for. You chose not to accept that apology and continue to bring it up. There is nothing more I can do.
I am offended by the term “fundie”. It shows a lack of tolerance and respect. (Insert fundamentalist complaining about lack of tolerance joke here.) For example, I do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle, but you will NEVER see me refer to a homosexual in a derogatory manner.
You defend your use of hard-on saying it’s not offensive, because there are worse things on this board. I guess I’ll just have to grow a thicker skin around here, but I am still offended by it.
I will admit that I do have a problem with being very judgmental of people. There is really no way I can know if someone is a Christian or not. Only God knows. All I know is that I am a Christian.
You keep implying that, since I have not read the entire Bible, I am not qualified to engage in a debate. I’m not the only one who sees this as absurd. I’ll let you know when I am finished reading the Bible. I don’t see how that will make my opinions any more or less valid, though.
You did not apologize to me, Twin. You apologized to Slythe for his taking that insult to mean you were applying it to him. You certainly made it clear that you intend, without apology, for it to apply to me.
Now, if you’re really apologizing now, fine. But don’t lie to me and expect me to believe it.
Perhaps you will recall this exchange, when next you seek to bring others to the light of the Love of God. What happened here was a response to your “witnessing” and you must, if you wish to serve the Lord accept the result as the true measure of your act. Did you bring anyone closer to the Lord?
It might hurt your pride to be objective, but your pride has no value to your soul. Be aware of the real effect of your words, before you witness in His name again.