Telling someone from a different faith/belief

[BilliardsBall]

If Utopia is the Paradise, then yes

I can perfect my behavior so that I never sin?

We may have different definitions of sin, human best efforts cannot end lust, coveting, desire...

 

[Spirit of Light]

I can perfect my behavior so that I never sin?

We may have different definitions of sin, human best efforts cannot end lust, coveting, desire...

The spiritual practice is about redusing or end attachments to lust, desire and so on, so yes it is fully possible but very difficult to do.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The spiritual practice is about redusing or end attachments to lust, desire and so on, so yes it is fully possible but very difficult to do.

If you knew someone who did perfect themselves, wouldn't they become an avatar, achieve Nirvana and disappear?

Seeing more and more souls on Earth seems to go against the practice of perfecting the self (without Jesus Christ).

 

[Spirit of Light]

If you knew someone who did perfect themselves, wouldn't they become an avatar, achieve Nirvana and disappear?

Seeing more and more souls on Earth seems to go against the practice of perfecting the self (without Jesus Christ).

In the time human beings are in now, it is more who can not see the truth in spiritual practice, so they choose to not follow any religion. But those few who truly practice truthfully still have a change to enlighten

 

[Trailblazer]

ETA: Of course, if one holds a belief in something that conflicts with what is objectively evident, they yeah, they’re wrong, and I have no qualm about their being told they’re wrong.

What do you mean by objectively evident?

 

[rational experiences]

I believed that religious iconography the basic theme was science. And the sacrifices in life self historic to its nations language and written words being similar yet variant. DNA advised.

As every human spiritual understands communal respect in owning the variation of self presence human. Yet a human in a life experience.

I learnt that DNA can be lived a male recorded life. Then a new born female inherit the patterning. Memory male life new a female. So then I learnt DnA past life memory and belief might be country orientated yet new baby life was now living elsewhere.

DNA religious practice had wandered it's spiritual memory advice.

As the records wandered. Cloud imaged where the vision was seen of holy men. Holy men DNA country yet deserts now without clouds amassing above ground changed.

I learnt eternal our origins is clear unseen spirit.
I learnt water is also clear holy.
I learnt God heavens origins clear. Immaculate.

So I knew why we learnt science. Eternal had returned two cold clear evolved bodies of historic eternal burnt. But had cooled.

Spirit eternal never burning learnt science by our two same bodied human parents. The same human parents of everyone...human.

Of course we would all own a same and mutual understanding. Science terms. Science basic. Not science for machines.

What I spiritually learnt knowing we all need our comfort as a spiritual advice. The status of knowing we are loved unconditionally to allow personal healing.

 

[SalixIncendium]

What do you mean by objectively evident?

That which, without bias, can be quantified independently and confirmed through examination, evaluation, measurement, and verification.

 

[Trailblazer]

That which, without bias, can be quantified independently and confirmed through examination, evaluation, measurement, and verification.

SalixIncendium said: ETA: Of course, if one holds a belief in something that conflicts with what is objectively evident, they yeah, they’re wrong, and I have no qualm about their being told they’re wrong.

The belief in the bodily resurrection and the belief that Jesus is going to come down in the clouds and the belief that people will rise from their graves when Jesus returns conflict with that which is objectively evident, so why should anyone have any qualms about telling Christians they are wrong in holding these beliefs?

 

[SalixIncendium]

SalixIncendium said: ETA: Of course, if one holds a belief in something that conflicts with what is objectively evident, they yeah, they’re wrong, and I have no qualm about their being told they’re wrong.

The belief in the bodily resurrection and the belief that Jesus is going to come down in the clouds and the belief that people will rise from their graves when Jesus returns conflict with that which is objectively evident, so why should anyone have any qualms about telling Christians they are wrong in holding these beliefs?

Tell me how this belief is in conflict with that which objectively evident.

Tell me how you examine, evaluate, measure, quantify, and/or verify a bodily resurrection that allegedly happened roughly 2000 years ago didn't, or that a prediction of a future event won't happen.

 

[Trailblazer]

Tell me how this belief is in conflict with that which objectively evident.

It is objectively evident that bodies decompose after they die.
Bodies rising from graves is in conflict with that.

 

[SalixIncendium]

It is objectively evident that bodies decompose after they die.
Bodies rising from graves is in conflict with that.

Then you have accounted for every body that has died, including Jesus’ and for all bodies that will die in the future?

Is it objectively evident that the sun will expand and envelop the earth?

There is a difference between “likely to occur” and “objectively evident.”

 

[Trailblazer]

Then you have accounted for every body that has died, including Jesus’ and for all bodies that will die in the future?

I do not have to account for every body that ever died....
Is there any evidence that any body has ever come back to life after it has died and decomposed?
If not, why would any sane person believe that ever happened or will ever happen in the future?

 

[SalixIncendium]

I do not have to account for every body that ever died....

You kinda do if you want to call it objectively evident.

Is there any evidence that any body has ever come back to life after it has died and decomposed?

Well, you've hit the daily double on logical fallacies. Strawman and shifting the burden of proof.

If not, why would any sane person believe that ever happened or will ever happen in the future?

Because it's holy writ.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, you've hit the daily double on logical fallacies. Strawman and shifting the burden of proof.

I do not have the burden of proof because I never claimed that Jesus rose from the dead or that anyone else will ride from the dead. the Christians make those claims so they carry the burden.

Because it's holy writ.

The gospels were written by men, unnamed authors. They were not written by God or even a Manifestation of God so they are not holy writ.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I do not have the burden of proof because I never claimed that Jesus rose from the dead or that anyone else will ride from the dead. the Christians make those claims so they carry the burden.

You have the burden of proof of demonstrating that no one ever has arisen from the dead.

The gospels were written by men, unnamed authors. They were not written by God or even a Manifestation of God so they are not holy writ.

What a silly argument. Look up the definition of holy writ.

 

[Earthtank]

and come to the conclusion that as a Muslim, it would be wrong of me to tell a person from a different faith or belief that they are wrong

I would not be so direct to tell them it's wrong rather, ask questions, see if their faith is based on logic and rational then, explain your faith to them and allow them to reach their own conclusion. Your own holy scripture, the Quran says in 18:29 "And say: "The truth is from your Lord." Then whosoever wills, let him believe, and whosoever wills, let him disbelieve.". So technically its not your place to tell them what is right or wrong simply present a reasonable, logical and rationale argument then, let them do what they want.

 

[Trailblazer]

You have the burden of proof of demonstrating that no one ever has arisen from the dead.

No, you have that backwards, I have no burden of proof because I did not make the claim.
That would be like saying to an atheist that he has the burden of proof to prove that God does not exist.
The burden of proof is on the believer who claims that God exists just as the burden of proof is on the Christian who claims that Jesus rose from the grave.

 

[SalixIncendium]

No, you have that backwards, I have no burden of proof because I did not make the claim.

Actually, you did make a claim...

SalixIncendium said: ETA: Of course, if one holds a belief in something that conflicts with what is objectively evident, they yeah, they’re wrong, and I have no qualm about their being told they’re wrong.

The belief in the bodily resurrection and the belief that Jesus is going to come down in the clouds and the belief that people will rise from their graves when Jesus returns conflict with that which is objectively evident, so why should anyone have any qualms about telling Christians they are wrong in holding these beliefs?

That would be like saying to an atheist that he has the burden of proof to prove that God does not exist.
The burden of proof is on the believer who claims that God exists just as the burden of proof is on the Christian who claims that Jesus rose from the grave.

No. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. You made the claim. Now please present your evidence.

 

[rational experiences]

It is objectively evident that bodies decompose after they die.
Bodies rising from graves is in conflict with that.

Not talking relative but relativity.

Ownership man human group science thesis.

A human thought to name everything for science to convert obtain God stone powers.

Basic make agreed religious quotes. Man gave a detailed description said his words naming knowing could now convert. Yet what you were changing owned little radiation emanations.

Converting God mass science a world community agreement.

The basic man human awAre reasonings.

Then your own parents DNA genesis of your nation country is your known language and conscious comfort.

Science one agreement.
Self comfort born countries DNA parents

The two conditions separate.

Your country holy. DNA self different which you cannot deny. Natural self human holy presence.

But you can deny what God science caused to your holy bodies.

 

[Trailblazer]

Actually, you did make a claim...

No. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. You made the claim. Now please present your evidence.

I made no claims. I only said that the belief that people will rise from their graves when Jesus returns conflicts with that which is objectively evident.

The belief is in conflict with what is objectively evident since:
1. Jesus has not returned, and
2. People have not risen from their graves