Author Topic: Just in case anyone forgot  (Read 9138 times)

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2880
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #80 on: July 10, 2019, 11:53:48 AM »
As a former agnostic, I don't have a problem with lc (or anyone else) questioning. I'd like to try to understand the truth of reality. For me, it boils down to intellectual honesty. We should look at all worldviews skeptically - including atheism.

For instance, lc is like "you really believe that a woman was made from a man's rib?" If one is honest, wouldn't you say that is way, way more likely than life from nonlife? If we gave a team of scientists a man and told them to make a woman out his rib, that doesn't seem as far fetched as giving those same scientists a rock and saying "make something living out of this!" - and no they aren't allowed to pull of germs or something off of the rock for help. :P

After all, you have all the ingredients necessary for that situation to occur (human dna among other things). Does it sound improbable? Sure, but not as improbable than the other.

Or the case of morality (and a big reason why I switched sides), if there is no higher power, it's quite silly to listen to our conscience. Our conscience is simply a by product of our evolutionary instincts and it has no more understanding of a non-existent moral standard than anything else does. This is one of the things I really don't understand about humanists who cry foul on "social injustice". The folks committing the acts of "injustice" get their morality from evolutionary instincts and so do the humanists. If you remove your emotions, why think your instincts are more knowledgeable about something that you don't believe exists - objective morality- than theirs? Being "good without a god" is so much bs.

Our conscience frequently tells us to do thing against our best interest (give to charity, risk your life to save another), so why listen to it? It's about as rational as listening to your "gut feeling" that the market is going to go after March 2009. So much for ughh..."free thinking."
Paul


Ross812

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Move over KY
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #81 on: July 10, 2019, 01:36:28 PM »
As a former agnostic, I don't have a problem with lc (or anyone else) questioning. I'd like to try to understand the truth of reality. For me, it boils down to intellectual honesty. We should look at all worldviews skeptically - including atheism.

For instance, lc is like "you really believe that a woman was made from a man's rib?" If one is honest, wouldn't you say that is way, way more likely than life from nonlife? If we gave a team of scientists a man and told them to make a woman out his rib, that doesn't seem as far fetched as giving those same scientists a rock and saying "make something living out of this!" - and no they aren't allowed to pull of germs or something off of the rock for help. :P

After all, you have all the ingredients necessary for that situation to occur (human dna among other things). Does it sound improbable? Sure, but not as improbable than the other.

Do you honestly believe this rib story or are you just giving an example. I think that is what is so infuriating about this whole conversation is a believer will say something asinine like the above and state they are being intellectually honest in the same breath. Then a counterpoint will be made about a bible verse and it is a parable/story/metaphor. Or you ask for examples of problems in Christianity and someone brings up Catholic scandals and the response is "well that's a cult, they're not true believers" etc. It is a little frustrating to try an argue about the logic of the religion if you can pick and choose what is literal, who is a true believer, then state the interpretation can only be understood by the holy spirit within the believer.

Or the case of morality (and a big reason why I switched sides), if there is no higher power, it's quite silly to listen to our conscience. Our conscience is simply a by product of our evolutionary instincts and it has no more understanding of a non-existent moral standard than anything else does. This is one of the things I really don't understand about humanists who cry foul on "social injustice". The folks committing the acts of "injustice" get their morality from evolutionary instincts and so do the humanists. If you remove your emotions, why think your instincts are more knowledgeable about something that you don't believe exists - objective morality- than theirs? Being "good without a god" is so much bs.

Our conscience frequently tells us to do thing against our best interest (give to charity, risk your life to save another), so why listen to it? It's about as rational as listening to your "gut feeling" that the market is going to go after March 2009. So much for ughh..."free thinking."

Maybe the conscience is a set of evolutionary traits that favor the group over the individual and make it more likely the group thrives in the long run. Religion is the human adaptation to manifest the conscience over the population to align the conscience make the group even more biologically competitive. That is my intellectual honesty. Now, do I think there is some deeper spirituality to life that benefits those who meditate, say the rosary, chant the Ohm, pray to Mecca, etc.? Whole heartedly. I just don't believe the Bible, the Koran, or the Bhagavad Gita has a monopoly on it.

96% Fixed Income CDs, Muni, Corporate Debt - 4% SPX Options

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3353
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #82 on: July 10, 2019, 01:38:16 PM »
Quote
For instance, lc is like "you really believe that a woman was made from a man's rib?" If one is honest, wouldn't you say that is way, way more likely than life from nonlife? If we gave a team of scientists a man and told them to make a woman out his rib, that doesn't seem as far fetched as giving those same scientists a rock and saying "make something living out of this!" - and no they aren't allowed to pull of germs or something off of the rock for help. :P

Paul I'm not saying it's impossible. After all, If god exists, he can make a man out of a gum wrapper and a woman out of a spare cigarette, if he wants.

The point that Mr B pressed me on was "what scientific evidence exists which contradicts the bible".
Well, we have scientific evidence for how humans came to be, which directly contradicts the bible.

Quote
Being "good without a god" is so much bs.
Hah! I really find this hilarious. Let's try this again, because again the evidence is against you. 

Let's take an example: According to the bible, slavery seems to be OK. God, moses, jesus all seemed to be OK with it. In fact they encouraged it:

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. Ephesians 6:5 NLT


And for thousands of years we humans enslaved each other. All the while reading the bible, believing we were doing god's will, believing that "goodness comes from god".

And then over time human society gradually stopped enslaving each other. We as a society realized it was wrong. This realization came from the development of human society - not god.

And this same example happened with all the other bullshit from the bible that the "religious" now conveniently ignore. We realized stoning adulterers to death was wrong. We realized sexual slavery was wrong. Cutting off people's hands is wrong. Exterminating males and raping girls is wrong. Executing rival priests is wrong. Stoning a rebellious son is wrong. Exiling the disabled is wrong. etc. etc. etc.

And over time human morality realized these "words from god" were wrong, and so now you conveniently ignore them. That isn't god telling us to ignore this immorality, that is our own human morality guiding us.

So I'll have to say it, that unless you "religious" folks are out there stoning your son to death when he disobeys you, you are just as humanist as I am, and your morality is just as human-created as mine.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | tap | v | vz | wm

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2880
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #83 on: July 10, 2019, 02:19:33 PM »
As a former agnostic, I don't have a problem with lc (or anyone else) questioning. I'd like to try to understand the truth of reality. For me, it boils down to intellectual honesty. We should look at all worldviews skeptically - including atheism.

For instance, lc is like "you really believe that a woman was made from a man's rib?" If one is honest, wouldn't you say that is way, way more likely than life from nonlife? If we gave a team of scientists a man and told them to make a woman out his rib, that doesn't seem as far fetched as giving those same scientists a rock and saying "make something living out of this!" - and no they aren't allowed to pull of germs or something off of the rock for help. :P

After all, you have all the ingredients necessary for that situation to occur (human dna among other things). Does it sound improbable? Sure, but not as improbable than the other.

Do you honestly believe this rib story or are you just giving an example. I think that is what is so infuriating about this whole conversation is a believer will say something asinine like the above and state they are being intellectually honest in the same breath. Then a counterpoint will be made about a bible verse and it is a parable/story/metaphor. Or you ask for examples of problems in Christianity and someone brings up Catholic scandals and the response is "well that's a cult, they're not true believers" etc. It is a little frustrating to try an argue about the logic of the religion if you can pick and choose what is literal, who is a true believer, then state the interpretation can only be understood by the holy spirit within the believer.

Or the case of morality (and a big reason why I switched sides), if there is no higher power, it's quite silly to listen to our conscience. Our conscience is simply a by product of our evolutionary instincts and it has no more understanding of a non-existent moral standard than anything else does. This is one of the things I really don't understand about humanists who cry foul on "social injustice". The folks committing the acts of "injustice" get their morality from evolutionary instincts and so do the humanists. If you remove your emotions, why think your instincts are more knowledgeable about something that you don't believe exists - objective morality- than theirs? Being "good without a god" is so much bs.

Our conscience frequently tells us to do thing against our best interest (give to charity, risk your life to save another), so why listen to it? It's about as rational as listening to your "gut feeling" that the market is going to go after March 2009. So much for ughh..."free thinking."

Maybe the conscience is a set of evolutionary traits that favor the group over the individual and make it more likely the group thrives in the long run. Religion is the human adaptation to manifest the conscience over the population to align the conscience make the group even more biologically competitive. That is my intellectual honesty. Now, do I think there is some deeper spirituality to life that benefits those who meditate, say the rosary, chant the Ohm, pray to Mecca, etc.? Whole heartedly. I just don't believe the Bible, the Koran, or the Bhagavad Gita has a monopoly on it.

Ross, the point of the parable like what lc mentioned is that it is a parable.

Luke 19-27 (which is the slaughter them before me) one even says it's a parable!

"1 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once."

As for Adam's rib. I don't see why it's so "asinine" to think the probability of a woman being created out of a man's rib is higher than life from non life? Do you think it's harder for human dna to be created from another human's dna or for life to create nonlife? How is this not intellectually honest? Is there any evidence life can come from nonlife? There is plenty of evidence that human dna creates human dna. ;)

As for Catholicism, I didn't talk about that. I will say that it does seem that many of the higher ups are not following Jesus teachings. There are many, many good Catholics out there though.


As for the conscience and religion. You might be right. But, as I said before, we can ignore the evolutionary cravings to follow it. Much like it's silly to follow your hunger instincts to eat the candy if you want to lose weight. It's silly to follow one's moral instincts if you want to improve society. It might be better to have a eugenics program. If one believes that their conscience is only an evolutionary instinct, it's silly to follow it.
Paul

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3353
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #84 on: July 10, 2019, 02:47:44 PM »
Quote
Luke 19-27 (which is the slaughter them before me) one even says it's a parable!
What does that have to do with how you or anyone else interprets it? You choose to interpret it one way, I choose to interpret it another way.

I interpret that parable (the parable of the ten minas), as Jesus allowing the rich and powerful to grow richer and more powerful - and if anyone dares to try and stop them, it is OK to slaughter them.
And for those who follow the most powerful god and jesus, if anyone dares stand in the way of this god or this jesus, I am justified in slaughtering them.

Which of us is right and how do you know?

Quote
If one believes that their conscience is only an evolutionary instinct, it's silly to follow it.

There may be parts of evolutionary instinct that are counterproductive (eating the candy), the same way there are parts of god's book that are counterproductive (slavery).

In both cases, we try to ignore those parts. We try not to eat the candy. We try not to enslave the other.

However the decision and choice to ignore these parts is purely human. God doesn't say, "don't eat the candy", just like god doesn't say, "don't enslave the other".
« Last Edit: July 10, 2019, 03:01:59 PM by LC »
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | tap | v | vz | wm

MrB

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1108
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #85 on: July 11, 2019, 01:39:27 AM »
I don't follow your logic. Let's just take your first point and the first event mentioned in the source you cited. So how exactly did Jesus "inspire" the "Thirty Years War"??

https://www.history.com/topics/reformation/thirty-years-war

Quote

The Thirty Years’ War was a 17th-century religious conflict fought primarily in central Europe. It remains one of the longest and most brutal wars in human history, with more than 8 million casualties resulting from military battles as well as from the famine and disease caused by the conflict. The war lasted from 1618 to 1648, starting as a battle among the Catholic and Protestant states that formed the Holy Roman Empire.

...

With Emperor Ferdinand II’s ascension to head of state of the Holy Roman Empire in 1619, religious conflict began to foment.

One of Ferdinand II’s first actions was to force citizens of the empire to adhere to Roman Catholicism, even though religious freedom had been granted as part of the Peace of Augsburg.

Is this not a religious war? Is this war not caused by hatred between Catholic and Protestant groups? Are those two groups not founded on Jesus?

LC I'm trying to catch up here, you're quite a few posts ahead of me. Have a few things going on. I appreciate the engagement though.

In response to the above. Correlation does not prove causality. Look at the bold and underlined parts from the source quoted above. Firstly, according to the source Ferdinand was an "inspiration" to the conflict. It was also an important economic war with the Habsburgs. So there has to be a point where the actors in the conflict specifically and humans in general should take ownership of the conflict, from beginning to end. To argue that Jesus inspired it, there has to be causality and none of the above proves it.

Having said that the "call to arms" by God through Jesus under the New Covenant or last days is to spread the gospel. The message is simple. God created you and me. We've sinned against Him, a Holy God, and the wages of sin is death. God loved you so much that He gave His only Son, Jesus to pay the price for me and you, because Jesus had no sin He can stand in our stead. What you and me have to do is repent and accept Jesus then our sins are forgiven, we receive the Holy Spirit, which will put a new heart in you. That way your relationship with God is restored and you receive everlasting life with God under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

Judgement is real, but it is not for the Christian to enforce it. The Bible is very clear about that under the New Covenant. Rom 19: 14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. 17 Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. 18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. 19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” 20 To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

Jesus will bring God's judgement and the Thirty Year War will look like a tea party in comparison, so I'm not trying to suggest Jesus is some peace loving, cuddly, pacifist. Far from it, but that's another topic. The obvious cause for war is humans, inspired by the evil within. Mark 7 20 And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” There is the causality and the TRUTH.

MrB

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1108
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #86 on: July 11, 2019, 05:53:35 AM »
Hi MrB, this post is a response to yours...quoted the relevant items below:

Quote
Incorrect. Something is true because it is an inherent fact, not because it is generally accepted as the truth. The sun did not revolve around the earth until it was generally accepted that the earth actually revolves around the sun. Simply put TRUTH is absolute, not relative.
I agree but I was not talking about what makes something true, I am talking about how people know/accept something is true. I tried to be very clear in my language here.

The earth rotates about the sun, but we did not know this until we tested and observed. You can say JESUS IS TRUTH, but this is no different than saying the universe is GEOCENTRIC. If it cannot be tested and subject to independent verification, it means nothing.
Nope, we’re losing track here. I originally put forward the definition of TRUTH in response to your observation “I thought you were posting in support of how we are treating these folks”, exactly to point out that TRUTH is not relative to which side I’m on. How people, including myself, “know/accept something is true” has no bearing on the TRUTH.

Quote
So to say there is no evidence to contract the bible seems disingenuous. If it were "truth" then every word, sentence, story, phrase, would all be independently verifiable. This is simply not the case:

Quote
I’m happy to consider any evidence you can produce and I don’t mean it in a facetious way. Seriously.
Quote
Appreciate the honest effort, but I mean, the Bible says God made Eve out of a rib. Women did not originate from a rib. There is evidence which traces the evolution of homo sapiens, none of which involves the spontaneous creation of female humans from a rib.
I understand your opinion, but what facts are you putting forward? The Bible as a source is formidable in its historical authenticity (previously discussed). Taken together with the TRUTH that it expounds/intellectual consistency it makes sense that one can believe what it says. You will disagree with the latter, because that is why we're having this discussion in general. However, if the Bible is true as it claims then any competing theory should be false. Evolution logically then should be false. You will disagree. Convince me. What evidence "traces the evolution of homo sapiens"?


Quote
I can go on but I mean, this is pretty basic stuff. Something about a whale eating Job I think is another obvious one, a dude and an Ark. The evidence contradicts the exodus story:

Quote
many if not most of the places mentioned in the Exodus did not exist within the same chronological period as one another. Pithom (Per‐Atum/Tckenu) and Raamses (Per‐Ramesses), the two "treasure cities" claimed to have been built by the Hebrews, never existed at the same time. Pithom did not exist as a significant settlement before the 26th Dynasty. Prior to this, the settlement was known as Tckenu, and was still referred to as such in the Ptolemaic period. It was an obscure garrison town which mainly, if not exclusively, served as a waystation for Egyptian expeditions. Even in its enlarged Roman state, the town barely registered on either Egyptian or Greco–Roman accounts.[17] Per‐Ramesses, the Royal Residence of the Ramessides, was abandoned at the end of the New Kingdom, centuries earlier.[17]
Incorrect. The conventional chronological dates assigned to Egyptian history are clearly questionable. https://creation.com/egypt-chronology
Fascinating topic by the way.

Quote
Another example is the Exodus portrayal of Edom. Edom was not yet a nation. In fact, the region wasn't even inhabited yet. The place the Hebrews stop at wasn't even built until 800 BCE, as the earliest Iron Age settlements (copper mining camps) date to the 9th or 10th century BCE according to radiocarbon dating done by Thomas LevyWikipedia's W.svg (the previous estimates having been placed some 300 years later)[22] and the main excavated sites have been dated between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE. However, the latest the Exodus could have occurred and still be biblically accurate is in the 13th century BCE, meaning that if the radiocarbon dating is contested, the settlements would be estimated to be from the 12th or 13th century BCE, thus additionally slimming the "window of opportunity" for Exodus to have taken place.
Firstly, radiocarbon dating as a method is hotly debated as you will know. Here is a thoughtful discussion by an atheist, which shows you the obvious problems with the method https://paulbraterman.wordpress.com/2018/07/07/can-we-trust-radiocarbon-dating/
Secondly, the words in the Bible stands unchangeable for thousands of years. Surely if it was a document invented by humans and exploited by different groups then someone somewhere would have tried to change the facts in the Bible to line up with the conventional wisdom of the time? How come it's always the estimates around the Bible that changes as in your section in bold above?

Quote
Evidence of Egyptian history shows no sign of "plagues":

Quote
All of the dates put forward by advocates of the historicity of Exodus fail to correspond to any period of national chaos or collapse in Egypt, as would clearly be expected by such a series of disasters.

Ussher's 1491 BCE date corresponds with a time of ambitious Egyptian expansion. The reign of Hatshepsut was stable, peaceful and saw extensive construction projects and trading missions; this is known from actual material remains as well as Egyptian records. Her successor, Thutmose III, took Egypt to its greatest imperial extent, forging an empire from the Euphrates to the 4th and possibly the 5th cataract. These are not the signs of a nation that, just a few years before, had lost its entire harvest, its drinkable water, its army and its sons. There is no archaeological evidence at all of mass death and impoverishment in the early New Kingdom period.

The same holds true for the period of Ramesses II. Although there were a few brief reigns after Merenptah, and what appears to be an attempt to interfere with the line of succession (the Chancellor Bey affair), there is no evidence of national catastrophe. Not long after, during the reign of Ramesses III, the state was still able to construct numerous massive monuments (such as Medinet Habu and the temple of Ramesses III within the Karnak complex) and mount effective military campaigns on both land and sea.
Again conventionally accepted Egyptian chronology is questionable. However there is sufficient evidence of the plagues themselves e.g. the Bible (as a historical document), David Rohl's (a non Christian) writings, which mostly center around the Ipuwer Papyrus (Egyptian document). As a counter I would say you can argue that the extra Biblical historical evidence for ALL the plagues do not exist, but that non exists, is inaccurate.

Same goes for scientific evidence. The following source discusses scientist views, which dismissed the Bible's explanation for the reasons of the plagues, but clearly supports the notion that the plagues did in fact happen.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7530678/Biblical-plagues-really-happened-say-scientists.html

Finally the non Christian sources are again adjusting the estimates to line up with the Biblical account. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/12/151224-egypt-climate-change-old-kingdom-archaeology/


Quote

As I said, the stories in the Bible lack independently verifiable evidence. And the evidence we do have contradicts these stories.

Quote
Quote
Firstly, the bible has logical and scientific inconsistencies on seemingly every other page.

Please name one.
Many folks have made lists. This is probably a good starting point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_consistency_of_the_Bible

The study of inconsistencies in the Bible has a long history. In the 17th century, Spinoza considered the Bible to be, "...a book rich in contradictions."[38] In the 18th century, Thomas Paine in The Age of Reason compiled many of the Bible's self-contradictions. And in 1860, William Henry Burr produced a list of 144 self-contradictions in the Bible.[39]


Here's the mentioned Burr work:
https://archive.org/stream/SelfContradictionsOfTheBible/Self-Contradictions-Of-The-Bible_djvu.txt

Fallacy: Appeal to authority
However, I will go with your example below.

Quote

And one example:

GOD IS SATISFIED WITH HIS WORKS.

And God saw everything that he had made, and behold it was very
good. (Gen. 1:31.)

GOD IS DISSATISFIED WITH HIS WORKS.

And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and
it grieved him at his heart. (Gen. 6:6.)

God was satisfied until man rebelled against Him and then He was dissatisfied. Where's the contradiction? Contradiction is logical concept not a linguistic one. You would know that though, so what am I missing?


Quote
Quote
Quote
Thirdly, if we followed the scriptural teachings to the letter (as we must, if it is "truth"), society would begin to look like the ultra-conservative religious groups, who are some of the most immoral and oppressive of all the faithful.
Incorrect. Jesus specifically condemned what you suggest
Quote
I see: you must be one of the "true Christians", and all those ultra-conservative Christian groups are the "false Christians".

Again, how do we know your interpretation is any better than these ultra-conservatives? 


Who I am and what I believe has no bearing on the TRUTH. However the Bible does address the topic of true Christians. Interestingly enough my earlier post quoted Romans 12, which goes under the heading "MARKS OF A TRUE CHRISTIAN" I think you will venture closer to the TRUTH by measuring people you're referring to, including myself to said TRUTH.

Marks of the True Christian
9 Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. 10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. 11 Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit,[g] serve the Lord. 12 Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. 13 Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality. 14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. 17 Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. 18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. 19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” 20 To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Quote
Your previous response to this question ("So ultimately God’s Spirit interprets for us. Without His Spirit I will “‘Keep on hearing, but (do) not understand; keep on seeing, but (do) not perceive.’” Isaiah 6:9 ")

This is white noise. Do you have "God's Spirit" or do the ultra-conservatives? Or do I? Who has God's Spirit and can interpret the Bible "correctly"? How can we tell?
Firstly, under the New Covenant/last days we were promised the Spirit, but it's conditional in John 14.

Jesus Promises the Holy Spirit
15 “If you love me, keep my commands. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21 Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”

Secondly, how can we tell? Great question LC! By their fruits you shall know them. "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law."

You also want to read the wider context.

Life by the Spirit
13 You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. 14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15 If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

GREAT DISCUSSION. THANKS LC!!

Cigarbutt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1612
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #87 on: July 11, 2019, 06:03:33 AM »
Optional question for MrB:
I've learned to respect what you post here.
When you write TRUTH in capital letters, does it make it more true than truth?

MrB

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1108
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #88 on: July 11, 2019, 06:25:12 AM »
As a former agnostic, I don't have a problem with lc (or anyone else) questioning. I'd like to try to understand the truth of reality. For me, it boils down to intellectual honesty. We should look at all worldviews skeptically - including atheism.

For instance, lc is like "you really believe that a woman was made from a man's rib?" If one is honest, wouldn't you say that is way, way more likely than life from nonlife? If we gave a team of scientists a man and told them to make a woman out his rib, that doesn't seem as far fetched as giving those same scientists a rock and saying "make something living out of this!" - and no they aren't allowed to pull of germs or something off of the rock for help. :P

After all, you have all the ingredients necessary for that situation to occur (human dna among other things). Does it sound improbable? Sure, but not as improbable than the other.

Do you honestly believe this rib story or are you just giving an example. I think that is what is so infuriating about this whole conversation is a believer will say something asinine like the above and state they are being intellectually honest in the same breath. Then a counterpoint will be made about a bible verse and it is a parable/story/metaphor. Or you ask for examples of problems in Christianity and someone brings up Catholic scandals and the response is "well that's a cult, they're not true believers" etc. It is a little frustrating to try an argue about the logic of the religion if you can pick and choose what is literal, who is a true believer, then state the interpretation can only be understood by the holy spirit within the believer.

Ross I think this is a great point. Firstly for anyone accepting that God is who He claims to be and that the Bible is true does not have a problem with the statement that God created man from out of the earth and woman from man. Why would that be a problem if you can speak the universe into existence? As an aside, even the word "human" means from earth and "woman" is a female man; why not the other way around? Anyway, to the point thought, it is not intellectually inconsistent if your presupposition is that God is who He says He is.

Of course you can take issue with the starting point, but then you have to consider the intellectual consistency of the claim that matter was created from a big explosion and that man eventually evolved from that.

I think if you have an extreme starting point then each side has a huge chasm to cross.

MrB

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1108
Re: Just in case anyone forgot
« Reply #89 on: July 11, 2019, 06:30:27 AM »
Optional question for MrB:
I've learned to respect what you post here.
When you write TRUTH in capital letters, does it make it more true than truth?

Not to make you the BUTT of the joke cigar, but are you trying to say that TRUTH is a COMEDY?

Now back off, we're having a series discussion here ;-0