Rational Faith

[darkbeaver]

I don't need to. The evidence concerning your abilities on physics is publicly available to anyone snooping through CC or googling "forums", "physics", and suchlike terms in order to arrive here at CC..

That's the first bit of doubt I've ever heard here about my creds.

Christ is the root of Christianity, DB. Although the incarnation of Christ occurred about two-thousand years ago, the Spirit of Christ has been active in human history since it's inception.

But this incarnation occurs in all of us not just in one guy, that was the teaching until the imposition of Neo Christian thinking. In any case it's nice to discuss it with you.

 

[talloola]

I have changed the oil, charged the battery, filled up the tank and the tires are inflated. Do I have scientific certainty the car will start in the morning or do I have faith that it will start?

PS this is a hypothetical question
?

if its really cold don't forget to plug it in, don't have to do that here on the island.

that is the kind of faith i have in many things, has nothing to do with spirituality or religion,
just a sensible certainty that the car will start because of sensible things i did to it.

 

[Cliffy]

Christ is the root of Christianity, DB. Although the incarnation of Christ occurred about two-thousand years ago, the Spirit of Christ has been active in human history since it's inception.

Neo Christian because you don't understand what Christ means. It does not, nor has it ever meant a person. It is a state of enlightenment. Jesus supposedly reached that state of spiritual development but he was not the only one to do so. In some quarters, son of god was a title given to such a person but not all. They are not synonymous. Jesus reach a state similar to the Buddha and some others before him (the Beav can name them better than I). If you could find the original texts, the ones written before the Romans altered them to their own purposes, you would find the Jesus said he was the son of man, a child of god and that we are children of god. he never put himself above anyone and only claimed to be a servant.

You are a Neo Christian because you worship a deified Christ when there never has been one. If he was, then we all are.

 

[L Gilbert]

You attach a "rather than" to faith, LG, suggesting a subjectivity or a personal bias in your consideration of these two concepts.

Then Oxford's dictionary is subjective, as I was paraphrasing it. But you faithful types like applying your own contexts to words anyways. And if there is a human around without a bias of some sort, it's a dead one. My bias is less subjective and leans towards the idea of accuracy, and simply having spiritual confidence in something is not a good indicator of accuracy.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

The spiritual however eventually sheds the material:

And moves on to somewhere else? Then they must exist separately. You can't have that one both ways. I don't think you've thought this through very well.

 

[L Gilbert]

That's the first bit of doubt I've ever heard here about my creds.

Ah. Sorry. Wanna bandaid? I like your sense of haha.

Feel better?

 

[Motar]

And moves on to somewhere else? Then they must exist separately. You can't have that one both ways. I don't think you've thought this through very well.

Not somewhere else, Dex. "Where" only pertains to the material. Remember, the material is shed.

You are a Neo Christian because you worship a deified Christ when there never has been one.

I thought I was a "born-againer", Cliffy. According to LG, I'm a "faithful type." I've also heard the designation "bible thumper" from JLM. Sorry, Gerry. I almost forgot the label "hypocrite". I've been awarded so many presumed identities on this forum that I could easily qualify as an international spy : )

 

[L Gilbert]

I'd have thought using "the faithful type" wouldn't be all that offensive from your POV.

 

[Motar]

I'd have thought using "the faithful type" wouldn't be all that offensive from your POV.

"Labeling isn't always a cause for concern, and it's often very useful. It would be impossible to catalogue the information we process during our lives without the aid of labels like "friendly," "deceitful," "tasty," and "harmful." But it's important to recognize that the people we label as "black," "white," "rich," poor," smart," and "simple," seem blacker, whiter, richer, poorer, smarter, and simpler merely because we've labeled them so."
Why It's Dangerous to Label People | Psychology Today

We skew relationships when we place others in little character boxes, LG.

 

[Cliffy]

I thought I was a "born-againer", Cliffy. According to LG, I'm a "faithful type." I've also heard the designation "bible thumper" from JLM. Sorry, Gerry. I almost forgot the label "hypocrite". I've been awarded so many assumed identities on this forum that I could easily qualify as an international spy : )

I only used the term Neo because the Beav did and all I was doing is explaining why he used it. To me, a born againer is anyone who takes the bible as literal truth, when it is not. It is a plagiarized forgery and it in not logical or rational to base one's life on the literal interpretations of its contents.

 

[Motar]

I only used the term Neo because the Beav did and all I was doing is explaining why he used it. To me, a born againer is anyone who takes the bible as literal truth, when it is not. It is a plagiarized forgery and it in not logical or rational to base one's life on the literal interpretations of its contents.

Presumption precludes perception, Cliffy.

 

[Cliffy]

Presumption precludes perception, Cliffy.

Who is presuming what?

 

[Motar]

Who is presuming what?

"You are a Neo Christian because you worship a deified Christ when there never has been one." (Cliffy)

 

[Cliffy]

"You are a Neo Christian because you worship a deified Christ when there never has been one." (Cliffy)

Where is the presumption, that you believe in a deified Christ or that there never was one?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Not somewhere else, Dex. "Where" only pertains to the material. Remember, the material is shed

I shall resist the temptation to make bad puns about sheds out of that.

So the spirit is everywhere, not just god's but ours, or are you saying that location is a meaningless concept for the spirit? And clearly you are stating that it exists independently of the body it once inhabited. There's not a shred of evidence for that.

 

[L Gilbert]

"Labeling isn't always a cause for concern, and it's often very useful. It would be impossible to catalogue the information we process during our lives without the aid of labels like "friendly," "deceitful," "tasty," and "harmful." But it's important to recognize that the people we label as "black," "white," "rich," poor," smart," and "simple," seem blacker, whiter, richer, poorer, smarter, and simpler merely because we've labeled them so."
Why It's Dangerous to Label People | Psychology Today

We skew relationships when we place others in little character boxes, LG.

So you aren't a "faithful type". ok
Kinda off-topic.
But, it doesn't bother me to be categorized by people. I know who I am.

I shall resist the temptation to make bad puns about sheds out of that.

So the spirit is everywhere, not just god's but ours, or are you saying that location is a meaningless concept for the spirit? And clearly you are stating that it exists independently of the body it once inhabited. There's not a shred of evidence for that.

Let alone a shed fulla evidence.
Sorry, it was just a moment of weakness made me say that.

 

[Motar]

I shall resist the temptation to make bad puns about sheds out of that.

Well done, Dex! I applaud your restraint : ) There's promise in this one!

So the spirit is everywhere, not just god's but ours, or are you saying that location is a meaningless concept for the spirit? And clearly you are stating that it exists independently of the body it once inhabited. There's not a shred of evidence for that.

You refer to physical/material evidence?

 

[L Gilbert]

In case you missed the inference I made earlier: I am pretty sure that feelings towards matters of faith can't be relied on to count as evidence.

 

[Motar]

In case you missed the inference I made earlier: I am pretty sure that feelings towards matters of faith can't be relied on to count as evidence.

In an earlier exchange, LG, you and I visited the definition of evidence. Do you remember the different types of legal evidence? Page #10 of this thread.

So you aren't a "faithful type". ok Kinda off-topic. But, it doesn't bother me to be categorized by people. I know who I am.

Nor does it bother me, LG. Just trying to raise the bar in this discussion.

 

[cj44]

The day has drifted away from me and I see during my absence Cliffy has labeled me the anti-christ. Jeepers Cliffy.

Well, I'm happy to see Motar is on hand.

Are we still looking for evidence to prove the existence of God????? Slap to the forehead. Human examination and evaluation cannot locate God. He will not be revealed by scientific method. If you are interested in knowing God or knowing if there is a God, suspend your current beliefs and demands. Seek him as in go talk to HIm. And don't imagine you are going through a drive thru....."hey god, you there....no? well, I guess you don't exist". No. No. Be interested in finding Him. And make sure you go through the narrow door (Christ). You know you just might find Him if you go along His appointed way.

I think it rather rational to find God by His own methods.