Do you believe; and why?

[GMDino]

(05-15-2019, 08:48 AM)michaelsean Wrote: This is where I separate from religion which is mostly what's being argued here.  How could God not get what He desires?

Because people created a "god" to answer question they had no answers for.

Every group of humans has done it.

A couple of them got REALLY big and spread.

Now we kill each other over which story is "true" when none of them are.

They are stories to make us feel better and used by people to control the behavior of others.  Period.

So someone on a message board in 2019 can claim THEY are right and YOU are wrong because...god.

That's it.

And let me add I'm ok with people wanting to feel good about things they don't understand.   I'm okay with people believing what they want to make them live their lives a little easier/better.  Just stop trying to force everyone else to do it YOUR way.

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-15-2019, 08:48 AM)michaelsean Wrote: This is where I separate from religion which is mostly what's being argued here.  How could God not get what He desires?

Your question is "How can God not get what he desires"?

I believe it's because it's his will. He desires for us to be with him, which is part of the reason he created us. Not getting that desire only happens because he wills it so, not because of something acting independently of him causing a loss of him obtaining what he desires.

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-15-2019, 12:17 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If they gained "eternal life" wouldn't that be a good reason to call it The Tree of Life?  I guess I don't understand what distinction you're trying to make.

My point is that the "Tree of life" clearly had a meaning that did not mean it actually made us living, breathing, beings. 

So then, if that is true for the Tree of Life, why must one conclude that The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil literally gave us the knowledge of what is right and what is wrong when the Tree of Life did not have such a literal translation as to what it actually gives?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-15-2019, 10:03 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: My point is that the "Tree of life" clearly had a meaning that did not mean it actually made us living, breathing, beings. 

So then, if that is true for the Tree of Life, why must one conclude that The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil literally gave us the knowledge of what is right and what is wrong when the Tree of Life did not have such a literal translation as to what it actually gives?

If eating from the Tree of Life would have meant the would live forever it would have literally made them living, breathing beings long after they should have been dead. Thus giving them life when they should otherwise be dead.

Your point is the Tree of Life only extended life, it didn't create life because they were already alive?

[*bfine32*]

(05-15-2019, 08:58 AM)GMDino Wrote: passive aggressive post is passive aggressive.

And posts not about the subject is trolling. 

[GMDino]

For $45, Lance Wallnau and Jim Bakker will sell you a Trump/Cyrus coin that you can use as a "point of contact" between you and God as you pray for Trump's re-election in 2020. pic.twitter.com/EwKgGL7sNp

— Right Wing Watch (@RightWingWatch) May 14, 2019

 

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-15-2019, 12:11 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If eating from the Tree of Life would have meant the would live forever it would have  literally made them living, breathing beings long after they should have been dead. Thus giving them life when they should otherwise be dead.

Your point is the Tree of Life only extended life, it didn't create life because they were already alive?

Your argument is that the Tree of Knowledge literally gave Adam and Eve knowledge of right and wrong in the most basic sense of it. Yet the Tree of Life didn't give life in its most basic sense but rather a greater form of it. So then why conclude that the Tree of Knowledge was so literal?

[fredtoast]

(05-15-2019, 10:03 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: So then, if that is true for the Tree of Life, why must one conclude that The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil literally gave us the knowledge of what is right and what is wrong when the Tree of Life did not have such a literal translation as to what it actually gives?

Uh, maybe because right after they ate the fruit they gained the knowledge of the difference between good and evil?

Just a hunch.

[fredtoast]

(05-14-2019, 10:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  All that is required is to believe that Christ is the savior.

How can I believe something I don't believe?  There is no choice there.

What if your salvation required you to believe Santa Claus was real?  You couldn't do that no matter how much you want to.  No matter how hard you try you can not make yourself believe something that that you don't believe.

[fredtoast]

(05-14-2019, 11:10 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: The fact that God even offers us a way out means he cares.

No it does not.

Go back to my example of telling a girl she has the option to love me or get shot in the face.

Does the fact that I gave her a way out of getting shot in the face prove that I care about her?

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-15-2019, 06:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Uh, maybe because right after they ate the fruit they gained the knowledge of the difference between good and evil?

Just a hunch.

That's not what the bible says. It says Adam and Eve became "Like one of us. Knowing good and evil". But in what aspect?

[fredtoast]

(05-15-2019, 07:23 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: That's not what the bible says. It says Adam and Eve became "Like one of us. Knowing good and evil". But in what aspect?

What do you mean "in what aspect"?  If it is like God then is clearly EVERY aspect.

[Lucidus]

(05-15-2019, 12:49 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course the words matter; but l'll take you at your word that you didn't notice.  

As to asking begging for forgiveness; it's your personal relationship. IMO, if you believe and confess it publicly, it's forgiven long before you ask beg. 

When you say it's a "personal relationship" - may I ask in what ways? For example has God ever interacted with you in way that are actually demonstrable, or is it an intuition on your part? The reason I ask is because the personal aspect of the God - believer relationship seems to rather different than what we mean when talking about any other personal relationship in our lives. 

(05-15-2019, 01:28 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I wasn't speaking for them, merely summarizing their answers and inquiring why you choose to ignore their answers (faith) in search of answers they aren't providing (evidence).

As I started in the OP; I rather enjoy exploring the "why" of things, and moreover, I find the conversations to be interesting and thought provoking on many occasions. This thread has gone very well in my opinion. People have shared opinion, exchanged ideas and asked questions -- and all in a very civil and respectful manner. I think it has been, and continues to be, an intriguing discussion. I'm not sure what your objection is to inquiry, as it is a most useful toll in all exchanges or dialogue.

If I ask someone why they believe and the answer is "faith" -- I feel obliged to follow up and delve into why that is and how they came to that reasoning. The same holds true when someone asked me why I don't believe and I answer that I currently see no good reason to do so. It would be perfectly acceptable for that person to wonder why that is the case and what led me to that decision. 

If conversations simply ended at initial "why" and "because" -- without any further dialogue, what deeper understanding would we ever gain about each other?

(05-15-2019, 02:39 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: I think I'm starting to understand what you're asking.

There is no empirical evidence that you seek, there is only anecdotal evidence and personal testimony. This anecdotal evidence is only true to the subject and is only there as that subjects own testimony.

There is no process that you go through to come to a belief or to gain Faith, it just happens...at least for me it did but I'm one that has always believed in God for as long as I remember. It wasn't until I was 21 that I started to understand and learn. My Faith continues to grow as does my learning and understanding and will continue until I die, it will never end.

I hope this answers your question because it's the best I've got.

Thank you for the response. 

I agree that there is no empirical evidence, and I find that to be a huge problem for such audacious and extraordinary claims. I simply cannot place stock in testimony that is anecdotal and/or emotional in nature. It's simply too subjective (as you alluded to) and can be easily mistaken. I simply can't rationalize a belief in something for which there is no reliable or verifiable proof.

The "faith" thing has always been somewhat of a curiosity to me, as it pertains to religious context, not faith in the colloquial sense. I see it as the suspension of rationality in order to justify the wish / hope that it's true. 

My position has never been to declare that there is no God; only that I see no evidence to think it's the case or justify belief in it. For me personally, I see no reason to believe that a God exists until it can be demonstrated to be the case. Personally, if it can't be demonstrated, I feel non-belief in such a proposition is the justifiable default. 

[*bfine32*]

(05-15-2019, 06:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How can I believe something I don't believe?  There is no choice there.

What if your salvation required you to believe Santa Claus was real?  You couldn't do that no matter how much you want to.  No matter how hard you try you can not make yourself believe something that that you don't believe.

Sure there is. Just get out of your way. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-15-2019, 06:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it does not.

Go back to my example of telling a girl she has the option to love me or get shot in the face.

Does the fact that I gave her a way out of getting shot in the face prove that I care about her?

No, because you giving her a way out doesnt automatically mean you care for her well being. All it means is that you want her alive. Wanting someone alive doesn't mean you care about them. God doesn't just want us alive.

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-15-2019, 07:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What do you mean "in what aspect"?  If it is like God then is clearly EVERY aspect.

In what aspect.... as in to what point? What did it mean to "Know" good and evil? In what detail? If they knew every aspect would they not then know.... well.... everything? And us as well? Yet we dont. The fact that we even have to think about whether something is right or wrong means we don't know in "every aspect".

[Nebuchadnezzar]

(05-15-2019, 08:27 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Thank you for the response. 

I agree that there is no empirical evidence, and I find that to be a huge problem for such audacious and extraordinary claims. I simply cannot place stock in testimony that is anecdotal and/or emotional in nature. It's simply too subjective (as you alluded to) and can be easily mistaken. I simply can't rationalize a belief in something for which there is no reliable or verifiable proof.

The "faith" thing has always been somewhat of a curiosity to me, as it pertains to religious context, not faith in the colloquial sense. I see it as the suspension of rationality in order to justify the wish / hope that it's true. 

My position has never been to declare that there is no God; only that I see no evidence to think it's the case or justify belief in it. For me personally, I see no reason to believe that a God exists until it can be demonstrated to be the case. Personally, if it can't be demonstrated, I feel non-belief in such a proposition is the justifiable default. 

Since you don't believe it it may mean nothing to you but I have to say that even after the Hebrew saw the plagues in Egypt, saw the parting of the Red Sea, saw water come from rock, was fed every morning with Mana and every evening with fowl, they still rebelled. From Judges, Kings and Prophets, they still turned from God. Even after all the miracles performed by Jesus Christ, the Jews still rejected and it wasn't until the execution of Stephen that Salvation was preached to the gentile.

By the way, I hate televangelists and all those con men out there. Like the guy who said that God wanted him to have a private jet or those that say if they send them $100.00 they will pray for them. How about these fake faith healers? If they could actually heal, they should be down at Children's Hospital curing children left and right.

I'm ranting and on different topics, sorry.

[Lucidus]

For those that believe purely on faith, I would like to ask a few questions if you would indulge me?

Is it not the case that one could justify belief in any God based purely on faith?
Is it not the case that one could believe in any proposition based purely on faith?
Is it not the case that faith could lead one to both correct and incorrect conclusions?

If you answered yes to all three questions, then it seems that you would likely agree with me that "faith" is an extremely unreliable pathway to truth. If you do agree with that assessment, then why depend on it as a justification for your belief?

If you do not agree, do you apply the same standard of faith [in the religious sense, not the colloquial usage] to other aspects of your life? That is to say; do you believe other important things based purely on that version of faith?

[Lucidus]

(05-15-2019, 09:42 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Since you don't believe it it may mean nothing to you but I have to say that even after the Hebrew saw the plagues in Egypt, saw the parting of the Red Sea, saw water come from rock, was fed every morning with Mana and every evening with fowl, they still rebelled. From Judges, Kings and Prophets, they still turned from God. Even after all the miracles performed by Jesus Christ, the Jews still rejected and it wasn't until the execution of Stephen that Salvation was preached to the gentile.

By the way, I hate televangelists and all those con men out there. Like the guy who said that God wanted him to have a private jet or those that say if they send them $100.00 they will pray for them. How about these fake faith healers? If they could actually heal, they should be down at Children's Hospital curing children left and right.

I'm ranting and on different topics, sorry.

In response to your first paragraph, the obvious question from most skeptics would be -- how can you know that any of that actually happened and is anything more than allegory? It seems to me that for these examples to have any merit beyond the metaphorical, it must first be established that the deity actually exists. If the deity doesn't exist or lacks evidence for it's existence, therefore leaving me with a lack of belief, the stories seem rather unimportant in any sense other than a literary appreciation.

As to your second paragraph, I agree. Whether one believes in a God or not, I think they can clearly see the disgusting lengths dishonest people will go to exploit and take advantage of within the "flocks". I believe most religious people are good, decent human beings. I just disagree with what they've chosen to believe; mostly for the reasons they chose to believe it. Those are disagreements we can discuss and debate though, and in doing so, we don't have to dislike or treat each other badly.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-15-2019, 04:56 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Your argument is that the Tree of Knowledge literally gave Adam and Eve knowledge of right and wrong in the most basic sense of it. Yet the Tree of Life didn't give life in its most basic sense but rather a greater form of it. So then why conclude that the Tree of Knowledge was so literal?

Feeling ashamed of one's nudity is a greater form of knowledge of good and evil? In my opinion, that's pretty basic. Same applies to disobedience. You were a toddler when you learned to understand the consequences of disobeying your parents. Yet, Adam and Eve didn't understand what you did when you were 2-3 years old. I'll bet your parents don't punish your kids for that time you disobeyed them when you were 1 year old and didn't know any better.