@Ecbarrowes, to minimize confusion, please use the Reply to and quote functions. The quote function becomes available by highlighting text in a post then clicking “quote”. Thank you.
1 Like
Just give me your address and I’ll look up how to get there on my own without having to rely on your map.
How do you know what your god wants?
2 Likes
Ah … Mmmmmm… I don’t think the type of faith I have in your map should depend on what it is you do. I think it should depend on what I do. Having a false faith would be taking the map under false pretenses.
Let’s suppose you harbor angst against your mother. She does things that seem confusing, irritating, and perhaps malicious. As time goes by, a watershed moment comes when you see that everything she did was at great sacrifice, and for your own wellbeing. A deep heartfelt feeling overcomes you, that she loves you deeply, and that is her motivation. At that moment, you “know” that she loves you. Can you prove it to a scientist, someone who denies that spiritual evidence exists, an empiricist? No. Is it true? Yes. “Provable?” If you explain all of it to someone who relates to it, then yes, provable by spiritual evidence. Spiritual truths are proven by spiritual evidence. Physical truths are proven by physical evidence.
This doesn’t answer my question. “… what makes one body of evidence weigh more than another?”
Please define “spiritual evidence”, and explain why it gives evidence for your claims.
1 Like
So if this god doesn’t show itself and communicate directly with us, but instead relies on us to accept him only on faith, how does he “instruct us on how to succeed”, and succeed in what?
2 Likes
[quote=“Ecbarrowes, post:9, topic:5231, full:true”]
It is because faith is the principle of all progress and action. It is faith in one’s ability to build a skyscraper that drives you to do everything that ultimately creates it. Until it is done, there is no physical proof that you can do it. There is, however, spiritual proof. If we sit around waiting for physical proof, we’d all be bumps on logs.
[quote]
This is an equivocation fallacy. Religious faith can not be reinterpreted as hope or trust. We already have words for those things and you do not get to sneak ‘religious faith’ into the conversation as ‘hope, trust,’ or any related term. The definition of faith is clearly stated in your religious text. “Faith is the evidence for things unseen.” No, it is not. Faith is no ‘evidence’ at all. If it were, you would have to accept every religion ever known to humanity as true and well evidenced. “Faith” my dear friend is the delusion of the ignorant.
Faith is not the ability to build a skyscraper, determination, evidence in the form of physics, and trust in science, build skyscrapers. At no point is this “Evidence for things unseen.” [quote=“Ecbarrowes, post:9, topic:5231, full:true”] There is no physical proof that men can build skyscrapers? What planet are you living on? [quote] Science builds skyscrapers. Faith is what the idiots who hijack planes and fly them into buildings use to justify their actions.
[quote=“Ecbarrowes, post:9, topic:5231, full:true”]
There is, however, spiritual proof. [quote]
Please demonstrate anything spiritual. Demonstrate anything called a spirit which is ‘supernatural’ actually exists.
1 Like
In fact, with your example you proved that faith cannot be a reliable path to truth. Take a time out, sit or lie down. Have a cup of tea and think: If “faith” can lead you to a wrong conclusion, or a correct conclusion…how do you know? Therefore “Faith” cannot be an arbiter or a reliable path to truth.
3 Likes
If this is true then why do millions of people believe in a god or gods other than the christian god? They’ve taken their god or gods on faith too, and come to the conclusion they’re real. Faith in something is not a reliable way to determine the truth.
4 Likes
It seems to me that the same “spiritual evidence” that leads you to God (and I assume that you are referring to the God of Abraham) also led the ancient Greeks to Zeus, or the Native Americans to the Great Spirit, and the ancient Egytians to Osiris and Amen-Ra. This same spiritual evidence also seems to have led the ancient Canaanites to Baal.
But let us suppose that I am wrong, and that the God of Abraham really does exist and has eliminated any and all physical evidence of His existence.
One could reasonably conclude that this means that He doesn’t want us to believe in Him anyway . . . perhaps because He wants us to stand on our own two feet like a parent who wants his or her children to be functional, independent adults.
And besides . . . even if I decide to buy into the Abrahamic God, which sect to I choose when it comes to worshipping Him?
Many Catholics believe that all non-Catholics don’t gain Paradise when they die. The Jehovah’s Witnesses also believe that they have a monopoly on God’s truth, as does the vast majority of all Christian denominations (although I do admit that there may be a very few oddball exceptions, like the Unitarian Universalists). This means that even if I become a pious, devout Christian tomorrow, then I will most likely lose Paradise anyway when I die because there are overwhelming odds are that I’ll choose the wrong denomination.
When we consider these points in this context, then humanism and atheism become the smart bet.
2 Likes
[quote=“CyberLN, post:20, topic:5231, full:true”]
So, if I can provide evidence that the critter that lives in @Tin-Man ‘s garage wrote the book that you call the bible, then it holds equal weight to the evidence you put forward for your god? If not, what makes one body of evidence weigh more
Let me be perfectly clear on the paradigm that I am advocating: ostentatiousness, pretentiousness is not respected by “the universe,” i.e. God. If you say to other people that you have “evidence” of something, and you know perfectly well that you made it up, then you are not representing with integrity and ultimately, it will not fly, but bite you in the butt. So, please speak from an integritous heart. You’ll be doing everyone a favor.
Clearly, in order to act in congruence with another entity, one must ascertain the will of said entity. Two way communication is what is needed. Such does exist. “Seek me diligently with all your heart and you will find me.”
Epistemology is the study of how we measure truth. You have a very appropos question. Certainly some opinions are more weighty than others, some evidence more considerable, some witnesses more credible, big piles of it seemingly more respectable than smaller piles. But behind all the evidence lies the actual truth. It is possible to be convinced of something and it actually not be true. So, what’s a girl to do?
“Seek me diligently with all your heart and you shall find me.” This is the pattern for acquiring pure truth. Investigate every avenue, and at the end of that road truth is there to be found by diligence.
1 Like
No. It’s very simple. There is no “Truth” behind all sorts of evidence. And much of this sort of evidence is used by the religious. “Take personal testimony for example.” It requires nothing at all called “Truth” behind it. “God exists because I experience it.” No truth can be demonstrated and the worst possible kind of evidence…(personal testimony)
Evidence is plentiful, proof is spiritual. Because faith is the principle of power, and he wants us to be powerful, it is the development of faith that he is after in us. Knowledge of his existence comes through applying faith. This faith principle leads us to greater degrees of power to achieve joy, happiness, every good thing.
Are you able to provide a simple bulleted list of evidentiary items (say a minimum of ten) for the existence of your god that weigh enough for me to see the actual truth that lies behind it?
Have you not heard of story-telling as a means to convey ideas, teach, or propose questions? The use of parables comes to mind….
…and one you didn’t actually answer…
1 Like