ElishaElijah
Return
It’s different than the children’s picture Bible that you have, time to step up to the Adult version.Pictures too, had one like that as a child, it was fascinating, but then magic has that appeal to children.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It’s different than the children’s picture Bible that you have, time to step up to the Adult version.Pictures too, had one like that as a child, it was fascinating, but then magic has that appeal to children.
View attachment 63172
To be considered a believer in Christ a person would need certain evidence and proof of a changed life and heart, a new man and would say empirical. This is being born again, if this change isn’t evident then I would question whether that person was ever a believer in the first place. They may have gone to meetings and participated in religious activities but not born again of the Spirit. Would ask what soil in the Parable of Sower is that person, am I or you?
So not sure what that church was teaching or what you heard.
A good start would be to have a good look at what I actually said.Your experience is not evidence of a god, meaning that your presupposition that you are experiencing one is faith-based.
You seem to have your own meaning and definitions of wordsThe change may or may not be empirically evidenced, but the change does not represent empirical evidence for the claim a deity caused it, that is anecdotal; and of course the unreliability of such anecdotal claims is amply demonstrated from the fact that the claim is made by people who believe in wildly different religions and deities.
Who are you referring to “ the wealthiest church”.’You don’t know what I mean “the Laodicean church”?
It’s different than the children’s picture Bible that you have, time to step up to the Adult version.
I’m not shifting any goal posts, I’ve always said God delivered me immediately, you said the same thing happened to you but you turned your life around more than once so seems like you’re back and forth, a struggle, not too impressive.You mean with your unevidenced claim that it was immediate, and your unevidenced claim this was down to more than simply your belief in a deity.
My life was turned around, and no deity was involved or required. You are now shifting the goalposts. However in both instances the change commenced at a fixed point (call that immediate if you want), so it appears you have again shown only an empty bag.
I do not make claims, I make statements.And I don't see much in your claims.
Sheldon said: ↑
The change may or may not be empirically evidenced, but the change does not represent empirical evidence for the claim a deity caused it, that is anecdotal; and of course the unreliability of such anecdotal claims is amply demonstrated from the fact that the claim is made by people who believe in wildly different religions and deities.
You seem to have your own meaning and definitions of words
The Laodicean church is the lukewarm church who relies on their wealth and Jesus said He would that they were hot or cold, He would vomit them out of His mouth.I know who they were, and the Laodicean church are neither the wealthiest nor the largest Christian church, and again do they still exist?
I’m not shifting any goal posts, I’ve always said God delivered me immediately,
you said the same thing happened to you but you turned your life around more than once so seems like you’re back and forth,
a struggle, not too impressive.
I give the definition and apply that and you don’t agree. So the same when I give you a list of scholars and you say they aren’t scholars but by the definition they absolutely are.No I absolutely do not, though you might. Which words in my post don't you understand?
The Laodicean church is the lukewarm church who relies on their wealth and Jesus said He would that they were hot or cold, He would vomit them out of His mouth.
““And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, ‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God: “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’—and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked— I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.” ’ ””
Revelation 3:14-22 NKJV
Does this describe the wealthiest church that you were talking about or no?
Bro, you limping real bad right nowWell it didn't involve the crutch of a delusion in archaic superstition, in order to avoid substance abuse. Something you failed at according to you. Of course if you think that's more impressive than my life changing struggles, without even knowing one single thing about what they entailed, and want to pretend your delusion is somehow more impressive, knock yourself out.
I give the definition and apply that and you don’t agree.
Sheldon said: ↑
The change may or may not be empirically evidenced, but the change does not represent empirical evidence for the claim a deity caused it, that is anecdotal; and of course the unreliability of such anecdotal claims is amply demonstrated from the fact that the claim is made by people who believe in wildly different religions and deities.
No I absolutely do not, though you might. Which words in my post don't you understand?
Is that English?Bro, you limping real bad right now
You shouldn't make up a God who is obviously nuts because he doesn't believe he exists.
You don’t understand? You need crutches and more strength when God is much more than that.Is that English?
As an unevidenced presupposition, only.My presupposition stands...
Well it didn't involve the crutch of a delusion in archaic superstition, in order to avoid substance abuse. Something you failed at according to you. Of course if you think that's more impressive than my life changing struggles, without even knowing one single thing about what they entailed, and want to pretend your delusion is somehow more impressive, knock yourself out.
Bro, you limping real bad right now
Is that English?
You don’t understand?